






































» 



y 




% 

\ 

% A 

^ J 

4 ■ 


• 
















L 




V 










'-r ' 






; ■ t ' *' '■ * 



« £?''■■■ - ■•'. 


W>! 


m: 




; v‘ 


»#• 


vir 



.'^j,/fv,'. .'j'- y, -rt, 

. ‘ ••-■•r.'Vy^ , 

. . -■* ■ J • y**“ A *^V u* * 

^ '.u:. * V . ' ' ^ *^v\ ^ ' * ■» 


» • * • 



# '.i' • * • * .♦ 



,i^ 





^C- 


'..’rfV r 



'^^ I 


s:‘ti-.,. rv 



fil , ”-W'v- '.- ' 

[ ' c.,^SLm«4»V 


3 ^*.* 


•r- 





H* ' 

} '*.» ^ - 





' *^ -j 

^ II',/ 


^ •: ...^ 



Jy / 

% - 

^ ,f/i • ^jfe 

^ . I. :- 4 \ 

’%[!'■’ 'Vy:- 




,* /► »,.■ t' ’. 

j* • 


K • ' 

r. HA •.. ■■ 


.'•S •■ 


IW'AhT. 



:■■ • ■ r 


4 r: 




s, 




/ * d 






mVESTIGI-ATIOE OE OHAKGES 

AGAINST 

Milo H. Dakin 

BEFORE THE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ADRID 35, 26, anu 27. 1887. 


[From the Legislative Journal.] 



BY AUTHORITY. 


LANSING: 

THORP & GODFREY, STATE PRINTERS AND BINDERS. 

1887. 






































mVESTIGATIOI^ OF CHAEGES 


AGAINST 

ry 2- 

Milo H. Dakin 

BEFORE THE 


V\ ,, W. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 


APRIL 25, 26, And 27 . ISSP. 


[From the Legislative Journal.] 



LANSING : 

THORP & GODFREY, STATE PRINTERS AND BINDERS. 

1887. 




FKED IRLAND, 

CHARLES FLOWERS, AND A. M. HAYNES, 
STENOGRAPHERS, 


OCT 2 im 

[Dt ot D, 






0S.5z 


INVESTIGATION OF MILO H. DAKIN. 


Lansing, Tuesday, April 26, 1887. 

The House met pursuant to adjournment and was called to order by the 
Speaker. 

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Jameson. 

Roll called : quorum present. 

Absent without leave: Messrs. Case and Dougherty. 

On motion of Mr. Hill, 

Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Case for the day. 

On motion of Mr. W. A. Baker, 

Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Dougherty for the day. 

The hour having arrived for the 

SPECIAL ORDER, 

Being the consideration of the charges presented against Representative 
Milo H. Dakin, 

Mr. Snow, on behalf of the committee to investigate charges against Repre¬ 
sentative Milo H. Dakin, presented the following supplemental report of 
amended specific charges and moved that they be substituted for those hereto¬ 
fore presented and adopted by the House. 

SPECIFIC CHARGES. 

Articles exhibited on behalf of the special committee of the House of 
Representatives of the State of Michigan, appointed April 20, 1887, against 
Milo H. Dakin, member of the said House of Representatives, fram the first 
representative district of Saginaw county, in relation to the charges preferred 
against him for misfeasance, malfeasance, or venal and corrupt conduct in 
the office. 

ARTICLE I. 

The said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from 
the first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, and of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day 
of April, A. D. 1887, ani on diverse other days and times between the day of 
taking his said oath of office and the time of the preferring of said charges 
receive from John H. Shackleton, mayor of Saginaw City, certain sums of 
money for the purpose of corruptly using the same among the members of 
the House of Representatives of the Michigan Legislature in influencing votes 



4 


for the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw City then pending 
before the committees on labor interests and municipal corporations of said 
House of Representatives. 

ARTICLE IT. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, and of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of 
April, A. D., 1887, and on divers other days and times, between the day of 
taking his said oath of office and the preferring of said charges, solicit and 
endeavor to procure money from said John H. Shackleton, mayor of Saginaw 
City, from Frederic L. Eaton of Saginaw, and from various other persons for 
the purrose ostensibly of corruptly using such money among the members 
of the House of Representatives of the Michigan State Legislature, to influ¬ 
ence their votes in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Sag¬ 
inaw City, then pending before the committee on labor interests and munici¬ 

pal corporations of said House of Representatives, but, in fact, for the pur¬ 
pose of corruptly and unlawfully appropriating all or a part of such money 
for his own personal use and benefit. 

ARTICLE III. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, and of his oath of office, did, corruptly, on the 19th day 

of April, in the year A. D. 1887, between the day of taking his said oath of 

office and the preferring or said charges, make a list of names of certain 
members of said House of Representatives, of the State of Michigan, to¬ 
gether with the amount of money necessary to procure the vote and influence 
of each of said members named in said list, in favor of the passage of a bill 
to amend the charter of Saginaw City, then pending before the committees 
on labor interests and municipal corporations jointly, to-wit: 

S. Baker, $5. 

Baldwin, $5. 

Bentley, $5. 

Burr, $5. 

Crocker, $10. 

Diekema, $10. 

Dunbar, $5. 

Engleman, $5. 

Herrington, $10. 

Manly, $10. 

McCormick, $5. 

O’Keefe, $5. 

Perkins, $10. 

Rumsey, $25. 

T. H. Williams, $10. 

And that said Milo H. Dakin did represent to said Frederic L. Eaton, of 
Saginaw, that to secure the votes and influence of (said members it would be 
necessary to use with each of them the amount of money set opposite his name, 
thereby bringing the good name and character of said members into ill-repute. 


5 


AKTICLE IV. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, Member of the House of Representatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, and of the oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day 
of April, A. D. 1887, and on divers other days and times between the day 
of taking his said oath of office and the preferring o^' said charges, solicit 
and endeavor to procure money from John H. Shackelton, Mayor of Saginaw 
City, Frederic L. Eaton, and from various other persons, f(^ the purpose of 
corruptly using such money so obtained among the members of the House of 
Representatives of the State of Michigan, to influence their votes and efforts 
in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of the city of Saginaw, 
then pending before the committees on labor interests and municipal corpo¬ 
rations jointly, of the House of Representatives of Michigan. 

Dated Lansing, Mich., April 26y 1887. 

A. R. CHAPMAN, 

JOHN V. B. GOODRICH, 

H. W. THOMPSON, 

A. B. PIERCE, 

B. A. SNOW, 

Committee on behalf of the House of Representatives. 

Report accepted and committee discharged. 

The question being on the adoption of the report. 

The same was adopted, and the Speaker announced that the specific charges 
as so amended would stand as the specific charges in the case. 

Mr. Chapman, on behalf of the committee, presented the following 

RULES OF ORDER. 

The following rules shall govern the proceedings of the House during the 
investigation of the charges preferred against Representative Milo H. Dakin: 

Rule 1.—The House shall meet daily at 10 o’clock A. M., and continue in 
session until 12 o’clock noon, when the Speaker shall declare a recess until 2 
o’clock P. M., when it shall meet again and continue in session until 6 o’clock 
P. M., when it shall adjourn. 

Rule 2.—The Speaker shall preside and rule all questions of evidence, juris¬ 
diction, and incidental questions, which ruling shall stand as the judgment 
of the House, unless some member shall demand that a formal vote be taken 
thereon, in which case it shall be submitted to the House for decision. 

Rule 3.—At the opening of the investigation the Speaker shall direct the 
Sexgeant-at-Arms to call the accused in the following manner: '‘Milo H. 
Dakin, appear and answer to the charges filed against you by the committee of 
the House of Representatives of the State of Michigan on behalf of said House.” 
If said accused or his counsel shall appear they shall be assigned seats in front 
of the Clerk’s desk. The said committee shall also be assigned seats in front 
of the Clerk’s desk. The Clerk of the House shall then read the charges pre¬ 
ferred, and the accused may file answer thereto, and read the same. If the 
answer raises a question of jurisdiction the accused shall be allowed thirty min¬ 
utes to argue the same, and the committee a like time to answer. 

Rule 4.—One of said committee shall be allowed fifteen minutes to open 
the investigation on the part of the House. The accused shall be allowed the 
same length of time to open the defense. 


6 


Kule 5.—Each witness as he is called shall be sworn or affirmed by the 
Clerk in substantially the following form: 

You do solemnly swear or affirm that the evidence which you shall give 
upon the hearing upon certain charges preferred against Milo H. Dakin, 
member of this House, for misfeasance, malfeasance or venal and corrupt 
conduct in office, shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 
truth, so help you God. 

Witnesses in giving their testimony shall sit at the Clerk’s desk. 

Rule 6. —All the rules, legal and usual, governing cases of law in courts 
of record in this State not inconsistent herewith, shall be observed in the 
conduct of this examination. 

Rule 7.—Any member of the House wishing a question to be put to a 
witness, or to offer a motion except a motion to adjourn, it shall be reduced 
to writing and put by the presiding officer. 

Rule 8. —All proceedings or interlocutory questions ^ nd all motions may 
be argued for not more than fifteen minutes on each side unless the House 
by motion extend the time. 

Rule 9.—The final argument on the merits may be made by three persons 
on each side, and the argument shall be opened and closed by members of the 
committee on the part of the House, each speaker being allowed not to exceed 
thirty minutes. 

Rule 19.—On the final question whether the charges are sustained, the 
yeas and nays shall be taken on each specific charge separately, but previous 
to the vote any member of the House shall be allowed to speak not to exceed 
fifteen minutes. If any one or more of the charges are sustained by a major¬ 
ity vote of the members voting thereon the House shall then by resolution de¬ 
cide upon the punishment to be inflicted. 

Rule 11.—Any one of these rules may be changed by a two-thirds vote of 
all the members elect without previous notice. 

Rule 12.—The stenographers employed shall take the constitutional oath 
of office and shall take full minutes of all the proceedings, which shall be 
published daily in the Journal. 

A. R. CHAPMAN, 

J. V. B. GOODRICH, 

H. W. THOMPSON, 

A. B. PIERCE, 

B. A. SNOW. 

The question being on the adoption of the rules of order as reported. 

The same were adopted, two-thirds of all the members voting therefor. 

Mr. Perkins offered the following: 

Resolvedy That the Chair is hereby instructed to request Messrs. Diekema 
and Herrington to assist in the conducting of the Dakin investigation. 

Which was adopted. 

The Speaker then, in accordance with the resolution, requested Messrs. 
Diekema and Herrington to confer with and assist the committee in the inves¬ 
tigation now pending. 

Mr. S. Baker moved that 300 copies of the Rules of Order just adopted, be 
ordered printed for the use of the House, 

Which motion prevailed. 

The clerk administered the constitutional oath of office to the stenographers, 
Fred Irland, Alonzo M. Haynes and Charles Flowers. 


7 


The Speaker—The chair desires to state that it will be absolutely necessary 
that gentlemen present here to-day assist in keeping the best possible order, so 
that the testimony given by the witness may be heard by all the members, 
and further, that the back part of the house, back of the bar, be vacated, so 
that there will be no noise to disturb the members in the rear part of the 
room. 

The Sergeant-at-Arms will no\r call the accused, Milo H. Dakin, to appear 
before the House and answer the charges which have been filed against him 
by the committee on behalf of the House. 

The Sergeant-at-Arms.—Milo H. Dakin, appear and answer to the charges 
filed against you by the committee of the House of Representatives of the 
State of Michigan, on behalf of said House. 

The Speaker—Counsel for Mr. Dakin will be invited to occupy seats at the 
table, as well as the committee on the part of the House who are to conduct 
this investigation. They will please come forward and find seats. 

The accused, Milo H. Dakin, with his counsel, F. L. Dodge, L. 0. Holden,, 
and Phillip T. VanZile came forward and were seated. 

The committee on the part of the House, Messrs. A. R. Chapman, J. V. 
B. Goodrich, H. W. Thompson, A. B. Pierce, B. A. Snow, G. J. Diekema, and 
E. C. Herrington, also came forward and were seated. 

The Speaker—The Clerk will now read the charges preferred against Milo 
H. Dakin by the committee on the part of the House. 

The Clerk read the charges as follows: 

SPECIFIC CHAKGES. 

Articles exhibited on behalf of the special committee of the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives of the State of Michigan, appointed April 30, 1887, against Milo H, 
Dakin, member of the said House of Representatives from the first representa¬ 
tive district of Saginaw county, in relation to the charges preferred against 
him for misfeasance, malfeasance, or venal and corrupt conduct in office. 

ARTICLE I. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from the 
first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high duties of 
his office, of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of April, A. D. 
1887, and on divers other days and times between the day of taking his said 
oath of office and the time of the preferring of said charges, receive from John 
H. Shackelton, mayor of Saginaw City, certain sums of money for the purpose 
of corruptly using the same among the members of the Bouse of Representa¬ 
tives of the Michigan Legislature in infiuencing votes for the passage of a bill 
to amend the charter of Saginaw City, then pending before the committees on 
labor interests and municipal corporations of said House of Representatives. 

ARTICLE II. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of 
April, A. D. 1887, and on divers other days and times, between the day of 
taking his said oath of office and the preferring of said charges, solicit and 
endeavor to orocure money from said John H. Shackleton, mayor of Saginaw 
City, from Frederic L. Eaton of Saginaw, and from various other persons 


8 


for the purpose ostensibly of corruptly using such money among the members 
of the House of Eepresentatives of the Michigan State Legislature, to influ¬ 
ence their votes in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Sag¬ 
inaw City, then pending before the committees on labor interests and munici¬ 
pal incorporations of said House of Eepresentatives, but, in fact, for the pur¬ 
pose of corruptly and unlawfully appropriating all or a part of such money for 
own personal use and benefit. 


ARTICLE III. 

The said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Eepresentatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of 
April, in the year A. D. 1887, between the day of taking his said oath of office 
and the preferring of said charges, make a list of names of certain members of 
said House of Eepresentatives, of the State of Michigan, together with the 
amount of money necessary to procure the vote and influence of each of said 
members named in said list, in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the 
charter of Saginaw City, then pending before the committees on labor inter- 
■ests and municipal corporations jointly, to wit; 


;S. Baker. 15 00 

Baldwin. 5 00 

Bentley. 5 00 

Burr. 5 00 

Crocker.. 10 00 

.Diekema. 10 00 

Dunbar. 5 00 

Engleman .. 5 00 

Herrington. 10 00 

Manly.. 10 00 

McCormick. 6 00 

O’Keefe. 5 00 

Perkins. 10 00 

Eumsey. 26 00 

T. H. Williams.10 00 


And that said Milo H. Dakin did represent to said Frederic L. Eaton, of 
Saginaw, that to secure the votes and influence of said members it would be 
necessary to use with each of them the amount of money set opposite his 
name, thereby bringing the good name and character of said members into 
ilhrepute. 

ARTICLE IV. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Eepresentatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of 
April, A. D. 1887, and on divers other days and times between the day of 
taking his said oath of office and the preferring of said charges, solicit and en¬ 
deavor to procure money from John H. Shackelton, Mayor of Saginaw City, 
Frederic L. Eaton, and from various other persons, for the purpose of cor¬ 
ruptly using such money, so obtained, among the members of the House of 
Eepresentatives of the State of Michigan, to influence their votes and efforts 

















9 


in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of the city of Saginaw, 
then pending before the committees on labor interests and municipal corpora¬ 
tions jointly of the House of Kepresentatives of Michigan. 

Dated Lansing, Mich., April 26, 1887. 

A. R. CHAPMAN, 

JOHN V. B. GOODRICH, 

H. W. THOMPSON, 

A. B. PIERCE, 

B. A. SNOW, 

Committee on behalf of the House of Representatives. 

Report accepted. 

The Speaker—Mr. Dakin will now have an opportunity to answer the 
charges. 

Mr. Holden—Before answering, the counsel for the accused desire to request 
of the committee of the House the particulars of these charges, especially 
wherein it says, after fixing the dates wherein these acts were done “and on 
divers other days and times,and also in article four, after mentioning that 
he solicited from John H. Shackleton, Mayor, and Frederic L. Eaton “and 
from various other persons,^’ we wish to know the names of the persons, and 
when this was done, in order that we may plead. It is in the nature of a bill 
of particulars, which, in fairness to the defendant, we believe should be furnished 
us at this time. 

The Speaker—Do the members of the committee desire to be heard on the 
question? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I would say that'so far as I know there are no 
persons except Mr. Eaton and Mr. Shackleton from whom Mr. Dakin tried to 
obtain money, and that the date was on the 19th. We merely drew the ar¬ 
ticles in this way so as to cover any discrepancy which might occur as to the 
date or as to persons. It is drawn as declarations are drawn in court, stronger 
perhaps than we expect the evidence will sustain, in order to cover any contin¬ 
gency which may arise. I will state to the gentleman, however, that, so far 
as the committee are concerned, they do not intend to introduce proof of 
Dakin obtaining or attempting to obtain money from any other persons than 
Mr. Eaton and Mr. Shackleton, and the date as I understand it is the I9th. 

Mr. Holden—Then, Mr. Speaker, are we to understand from that that the 
matters for which we ask the particulars will be regarded by this House as 
surplusage, for the purpose of the trial? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I cannot, on behalf of the committee, grant 
the gentleman’s request. I will say that we would be willing to limit the time 
to the I8th, 19th and 20th. I think that will be satisfactory to the committee. 

Mr. Holden—May I ask if it will be confined to Lansing as to the place? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—We object to any such restriction as that. As 
I understand it it is not necessary that it occurred in Lansing. Anywhere in 
the State of Michigan or in the United States would make Mr. Dakin equally 
guilly. 

Mr. Holden—That we concede, but for the purpose of having an under¬ 
standing at first, and that we may be as fully informed as possible, I ask it 
only, not tnat it is any less an offense in one place than in another. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—On behalf of the committee we shall object to 
the restriction to Lansing. 

2 


10 


Mr. Holden—Mr. Speaker, we demand a bill of particulars of the places, 
times and persons. 

The Speaker—The chair is of the opinion that the demand on the part of 
the counsel for the accused would not be entertained ; that only such a demand 
would be entertained coming from some member of the House, the House 
having adopted these charges as being specific. 

Mr. Hosford offered the following: 

Resolved, That the committee of management upon the part of the House 
be requested to furnish counsel for the respondent, a bill of particulars of the 
persons from whom, the time when, and the places where, amounts of money 
were received or solicited as set forth in the several articles of speciSc charges. 

The Speaker—The question is upon the adoption of the resolution. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—We do not care to be heard without the other 
side say something. 

Judge Van Zile—It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that this ought to be granted. 
This man will stand here, after he has pleaded to these charges, as a defend¬ 
ant answering an indictment. Certainly this House of Representatives of the 
State of Michigan ought not to ask a man to stand here charged with so grave 
an offense as this without his knowing the specific charges that he is to answer 
to. They have merely told us that we have solicited money of Mr. Shackle- 
ton and Mr. Eaton and of various other persons. Now, what other persons? 
That we have solicited on the 19th of April and on divers other times. 
What other times? And where? Is it possible that this man is to be called 
upon to stand here upon vague charges, that even his counsel cannot understand, 
and that this great House of Representatives of the State of Michigan will say 
that they do not understand? Our request is one that I think the committee 
ought to grant without asking this House to pass upon it, and this House ought 
to say for what he is to be tried. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—We have already consented to limit the time to 
the 18th, 19th and 20th of April. We have also consented to limit the per¬ 
sons to Mr. Eaton and Mr. Shackleton, so that all they ask which we have not 
granted is that we shall name the amount of money. Now I insist that that 
could not be requested in a court of law and I deny that this is a formal pro¬ 
ceeding like a trial in a court of justice or an impeachment trial. We are 
proceeding in an informal way to investigate the truth of these charges, and 
all that is required is that he be given an opportunity to appear and answer. 
Now the guilt is just as great, so far as deteraining whether he is guilty or 
not, or whether these charges are sustained or not, if he obtained one penny or 
tried to obtain one penny. It is the duty of this House to find these charges 
sustained just as much as though he had tried to obtain one million dollars. 
The amount is immaterial. The question is whether he did try to obtain the 
money. If we are limited as to the amount here and we say five dollars and 
some witness puts it at ten, then that proof would be thrown out. I say it is 
unjust and improper to require us to limit the amount, to name the specific 
amount. Next as to the place where. A witness might have told this com¬ 
mittee that the conversation took place on the street here in the city of Lan¬ 
sing. Afterward in thinking it over it might come to him that it occurred on 
the cars. Several conversations might have been had upon the matter, one in 
Lansing, another in Saginaw, and perhaps another on the train between here 
and there; and to limit us, to say that we shall name these places, would also 
be unjust. The great question is, “Did he solicit money?’’ not the amount nor 
where. Did he solicit it? That is the question we are to determine. 



11 


Mr. Holden—Mr. Speaker: In reply to the gentleman’s argument, I cal! 
attention to rule 6, which reads as follows: ‘‘All the rules legal and usual 
governing cases at law in courts of record in this State, not inconsistent 
herewith, shall be observed in the conduct of this examination.” The rule 
itself answers the part of the gentleman’s argument in which he says we are 
not to be governed by the methods of procedure in courts of justice. In 
regard to the other part, in which he says it is improper for us to ask the 
amounts of money that he obtained, or sought to obtain, I say we have not 
asked it. The gentleman misapprehends the wording of the resolution. 
We ask for the place where. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Let^ me read as follows: “The places 
where and amounts of money.” 

Mr. Van Zile—“ Places where amounts of money.” Not “ and amounts.” 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I misapprehended the wording of the reso¬ 
lution. 

Mr. Holden.—The writing is in the hand of a lawyer and the gentleman 
might very readily mistake it. Now, if we are not to have the specihc places 
as nearly as may be consistent with justice and in accordance with the usual 
and established methods of procedure and rules of evidence governing courts 
of record in this State, then why present any charges at all ? This is a most 
serious matter. If convicted, the stigma, the stain and disgrace is greater in 
my judgment than if this respondent had been convicted of a felony in a court 
of justice; for I cannot imagine a greater disgrace than the expulsion of a 
member of this honorable body by bis associates. It is important to him and 
alike important to the people of this State. We ask simply that the members 
of this House accord to this respondent the particulars of tne transaction as 
fully as may be, and in accordance with the rules of procedure as mentioned 
in rule 6. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—Mr. Speaker: In answer to the argument made 
by the last gentleman, let me say that this House of Representatives has al¬ 
ready been more specific than was at all necessary. All that would have 
been necessary would have been to appoint a committee, allow the accused, 
Mr. Dakin, to appear before that committee, present the report of that com¬ 
mittee, and then this House might act. But this House in its sense of fair¬ 
ness and justice to the accused, has already gone far beyond that and has 
given charges just as specific as it seems to me the gentleman representing 
him ought to ask. We insist that we will make them no more specific rela¬ 
tive to place, and this is the only question that now is before us. 

The Speaker—The question is on the adoption of the resolution offered 
by the gentleman from Wayne, that the committee specify more particularly 
the parties and places where and from whom Mr. Dakin solicited money. 

The resolution was then not adopted by the Hpuse. 

The Speaker—Counsel for the accused may now file answers to the charges 
on the part of the committee. 

Mr. Holden—The defense ask for time in which to file written answers, for 
this reason: The counsel, a part of them at least, did not arrive in this city, 
and knew nothing of the charges until after eleven o’clock last night. A con¬ 
ference was then had as fully as might be at that late hour at night, but we 
we were unable to complete our answer. We had it nearly completed, but by 
reason of the change which has since been made we desire to formulate it anew, 
and believe that it is in the interest of the defendant that it should be done. 


12 


I will say that the question of jurisdiction will not be raised in the answer, as I 
believe. We shall be as expeditious as possible. 

The Speaker—If the counsel are granted more time it will be necessary to 
come in the form of a motion from some member of the House. 

The counsel for the accused and the committee held a short consultation. 

Judge Van Zile—Mr. Speaker: After consultation with the gentlemen of 
the committee, it is agreed that we shall proceed as though an answer of gen¬ 
eral denial were filed, and that during the day the formal answer will be com¬ 
pleted and filed, and stand as the answer filed as of this time, that is, to be 
filed at that time nunc pro tunc. 

The Speaker—That being the agreement^between the committee and counsel 
for the accused, some member on behalf of the committee will now be allowed 
to open the case before the House. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives: We have before us to-day such a case as has never been known 
in the history of this State, where an attempt has been made to try one of 
the members of the House of Representatives of the State of Michigan. 
You are to act as jurors upon this case and I propose to make a short state¬ 
ment to you. I do not consider it necessary to make a lengthy statement for 
two reasons; first, that the committee appointed for the purpose of prosecuting 
this case on behalf of the House believe that it is proper and right to expe¬ 
dite matters as much as possible. The second reason is, that although }Ou are 
to sit as jurors you may not be considered as jurors in the common acceptation 
of the term in courts of record or before justices of the peace, for the reason 
that they are not supposed to know anything: about the case that is at issue. It 
has almost become a noted fact that if a man has learned to read or write it is a 
disqualification for him to sit as a juror. But you know something of this 
case, you know all about it, as far as the charges are concerned. You have 
heard them read, you have talked this matter over among yourselves and you 
understand it fully, and that is the reason why I do not propose to make a 
lengthy statement before you. 

In the first place I will say that the committee who have been appointed by 
this House to prefer charges against Milo H. Dakin accuse him of misfeasance, 
malfeasance and venal and corrupt conduct while a member of this House of 
Representatives of the State of Michigan. And I will say this, gentlemen of 
the House, that we expect to prove every one of the charges that we have made 
against him. Although we may be sorry and mourn almost, as it were, that 
these things have occurred, yet we expect to prove misfeasance, malfeasance, 
venal and corrupt conduct upon the part of Milo H. Dakin, a member of this 
House. Permit me to say, gentlemen of the House, as there may be some 
among you who do not perhaps understand the real definition of these terms 
that we use, malfeasance, misfeasance and venal or corrupt conduct. I will 
give you the definition of misfeasance as it is laid down in Webster, and as it is 
also laid down in our law dictionaries. First, misfeasance is a trespass in law. 
It may be recognized as a trespass, but yet there is a further definition to it in 
law. It may be any wrong perpetrated. It is a wrong perpetrated by another. 
A wrong doing is another definition. Another definition is the improper doing 
of an act which a person might do lawfully, an improper act of a person which 
he might do lawfully. It might be a wrong act, morally wrong, it might injure 
himself or injure those by whom he is surrounded, and yet not be an unlawful 
act. This, as I understand, is the definition of the word misfeasance. 


13 


Malfeasance is doing of an act which a person ought not to do. Another 
definition for malfeasance is, evil conduct. Now, we say that if the mem¬ 
ber of this House who has had charges preferred against him is guilty of evil 
conduct, that member is guilty or malfeasance in office. That if he has 
committea this evil conduct during his term of office. Another definition is, 

an illegal deed.” You will readily see under the definition of this word 
malfeasance, that it is the doing of an act which a person ought not to do, 
and also evil conduct. We expect to prove these against the respondent in 
this case. We expect to prove that he wrongfully, on or about the 19th day 
of April of the present year, did receive a certain sum of money from the 
mayor of the city of Saginaw for certain purposes, and those purposes we 
expect to prove were corrupt purposes, and that he committed a wrong act in 
receiving that money for the purpose that he did receive it for. 

We expect to show this by testimony that will be produced. We expect 
further to show that he not only received money for the purpose of expending 
that money, under his own statement of the case, for the purpose of spend¬ 
ing it among the members of this House, but that he took it for the purpose 
of influencing votes in this House, under his statement of the case—for the 
purpose of obtaining members to vote for a certain bill then pending before 
the Legislature of the State of Michigan. We expect to show these facts, 
and thereby show that he did commit a gross wrong, that his conduct was 
bad and that he is guilty of misfeasance and malfeasance in office. 

We expect further to show that he not only received money for this purpose, 
but that he solicited and continued to solicit more money from the same party 
for this special purpose, the purpose being not directly to influence votes, but 
as he said, as we expect to prove, “to see the boys with.” In response to a 
question being asked him if he thought that the members could be influenced 
in that way with money, he said “Why yes, of course they can.” And by 
making this statement we shall hold, as we think, that we are able to prove 
these things against the respondent in this case; I say by making that state¬ 
ment we shall contend before this honorable body that the respondent in this 
action is guilty of malfeasance and of misfeasance in office. 

But we have another charge here. Notwithstanding that we accuse the 
respondent of making these statements and of saying these things, that mem¬ 
bers could be influenced, that he could influence the votes of members in this 
direction, yet from his own confession and from his own statements we be¬ 
lieve that he has perpetrated a gross wrong in this, and we accuse him of this 
—of telling a falsehood in the case because, under his own confessions, he has 
said that he did not believe— 

Mr. Van Zile—Where is that charge? I do not find it. 

Mr. Conductor Groodrich—In the second article. 

Mr. Van Zile—There is no such charge here in the bill, that he has com¬ 
mitted falsehood. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—I leave the gentleman to determine this for him¬ 
self as he reads the charges. If he will read the second charge and the fourth 
charge he will see that this committee have accused the respondent of telling 
a falsehood, although they may not have said it in so many words. I will 
read the charges. The second article reads: 

“That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from 
the first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high du¬ 
ties of his office, and of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of 
April, A. D. 1887, and on divers other days and times between the day of 


14 


taking his said oath of office and the preferring of said"charges, solicit and en¬ 
deavor to procure money from said John H. Shackleton, mayor Saginaw City, 
from Frederic L. Eaton of Saginaw, and from various other persons for the 
purpose ostensibly of corruptly using such money among the members of the 
House of Representatives of the Michigan State Legislature, to influence their 
votes in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw (Jity, 
then pending before the committees on labor interests and municipal corpora¬ 
tions of said House of Representatives, but in fact for the purpose of corrupt¬ 
ly and unlawfully appropriating all or a part of such money for his own personal 
use and benefit.” 

Here is the charge made by the committee: “ But in fact for the purpose of 
corruptly and unlawfully appropiiating all ora part of such money for his own 
personal use and benefit.” 

Here the Speaker’s gavel fell. 

The Speaker—The gentleman’s time is up. What is the pleasure of the 
House ? 

Mr. W. W. Williams moved that the gentlemen’s time be extended. 

Which was agreed to. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich (Resuming)—Now we expect, gentlemen, to show 
to you clearly, not only from his own confessions, but from the circumstances 
of the case, notwithstanding he had received this money, notwithstanding he 
had solicited other moneys, yet he did not intend to use the money, as he has 
stated and confessed to others, but to put this money in his own pocket; and 
hence we accuse him in this way of falsifying. You will see that the fourth 
article reads the same way, except the last portion of the article. 

This, gentlemen, is all that 1 care to state to you upon this occasion. My 
time is up. I intended to be short. As 1 said before, we expect to prove that 
this respondent is guilty of wrong doing, of bad conduct, that he has not only 
injured himself, but by his conduct, by his ungentlemanly deportment, so far as 
that is concerned, brought a reproach and a stain upon this House and upon 
the members connected with this Legislature that it will take years to obliter¬ 
ate. I say that, if we prove the charges that we have laid against him, he is 
guilty of misfeasance, malfeasance and venal corruption while a member of the 
Legislature of the State of Michigan. We have preferred these charges against 
him, believing that you will deal justly with him, and that you will weigh care¬ 
fully and seriously all the evidence that shall come before you. 

We, as committmen, appointed by the House, feel that we have something 
upon our shoulders; that we have a burden of responsibility in the work that 
is before us. But we want to act fairly and we are determined to do so. And 
while we are attempting and shall desire all the way through the trial of this 
case to act fairly and honestly and candidly, yet we also want to see the digni¬ 
ty of the House of Representatives and of this Legislature maintained, and we 
are determined to do this faithfully and honestly and to bring before this 
House who sit as a jury, as I said before, all the facts pertaining to the case. 

Mr. Dodge—Will the gentleman permit me to interrupt him ? 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—Certainly. 

Mr. Dodge—Will you please define the term ‘‘ venal corruption.” 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—The gentleman asks me to define the term venal 
corruption.” 

Mr. Dodge—As used in this connection. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—The definition is ‘‘To be bought or obtained for 
money.” That is one definition that Webster gives: “To be bought or ob- 


15 


tained for money.” Now, any man that can be bought or can be obtained for 
money I apprehend is guilty of venal corruption. The definition goes further : 
“ To be bought or obtained for money or other valuable consideration^ Any¬ 
thing, I do not care what it is, if it is only a drink of beer, he is guilty if he 
can be bought for a drink of beer, or a drink of whisky, or a cigar. He is 
guilty of venal corruption under the definition. If he is made a matter of 
trade or barter, or if he is held for sale in any way, he is guilty of venal cor¬ 
ruption. 

Mr. Van Zile—Is that charged against the respondent? 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—We charge him with venal corruption, certainly. 
We set it right out in the preliminary statement. It is already embodied in 
these articles in this way: 

Mr. Dodge—Which article is that contained in? 

Mr. Goodrich—It is at the head, at the beginning, and in that way it runs 
through all the articles, being connected with articles 1, 2, 3 and 4. We set it 
out at the head of our articles and we say: 

‘‘Articles exhibited on behalf of the special committee of the House of 
Kepresentatives of the State of Michigan, appointed April 20, 1887, against 
Milo H. Dakin, member of the said House of Representatives from the first 
representative district of Saginaw county, in relation to the charges preferred 
against him for misfeasance, malfeasance or venal and corrupt conduct in 
office.” 

We consider that he is guilty of all this if we prove the charges to be true. 

The Speaker—Is it the pleasure of the counsel for the accused to open their 
case now? 

Judge Van Zile—Not at this time. 

The Speaker—The gentlemen on behalf of the committee will now bring 
forward their witnesses in support of the charges against Mr. Dakin. 

Mr. Frederic L. Eaton being produced and duly sworn, being examined by 
Mr. Conductor Diekema, testified as follows: 

Q. Where do yon reside? 

A. Saginaw City, Michigan. 

Q. How old are you? 

A. Fifty-one years. 

Q. How long have you been a resident of Saginaw? 

A. Upwards of twenty years. 

Q. Have you held any official position there? 

A. I have, several. 

Q. What are they? 

A. I held the office of justice of the peace for eight years, member of the 
board of supervisors for about twelve years I think, comptroller of the city of 
Saginaw for six years. During the last year I held the office of city attorney. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Milo H. Dakin, Representative from the Sagi¬ 
naw district? 

A. I am to a certain extent. 

Q. How long have you known him? 

A. Casually four or five years, perhaps six.' 

Q. Did you meet Mr. Dakin on or about the 19th day of April last? 

A. I did. 

Q. Where did you meet him? 

A. In this city. First in this building. 

Q. What part of this building? 


16 


A. In the corridor on the lower floor; not the basement, but the first 
floor. 

Q. Who was present with you when you met Mr. Dakin on the 19th? 

A. J. Smith, of Saginaw City. 

Q. In what part of this city did you meet Mr. Dakin? 

A. As we came in at the front door coming from Michigan Avenue. 

Q. Was Mr. Dakin alone? 

A. No; Mr. Fellows, of Saginaw City, was with him. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Dakin at that time ? 

A. I did. 

Q. About what time of day was it ? 

A. About half past ten o’clock in the morning. It was on the arrival of 
the Saginaw train. 

Q. What was your business in Lansing that day ? 

A. There waspending at the time before the committee on labor interests 
and the committee on municipal corporations of this House a bill to revise the 
charter of the city of Saginaw. I was one of a committee charged presenting 
the merits of that bill to the committee, and a session of the committee for 
that purpose had been appointed for that day at one o’clock, and I was here 
in company with other citizens of that committee from Saginaw for the pur¬ 
pose of discharging that duty. 

Q. Did you at that time have anv conversation with Mr. Dakin about this 
bill? 

A. I did. 

Q. State what it was. 

A. Mr. Smith and myself both saluted Mr. Dakin and Mr. Fellows. I tnen 
said to Mr. Dakin, “What is the situation of our bill at the present time?” Mr. 
Dakin replied “There will be nothing done, there is no use of your going up.’^ 
I said that of course there would be nothing done that morning, as the ap¬ 
pointment was for one o’clock. 

He said, “There will be nothing done, then; there will be nothing done 
to-day.” I asked why not, and he said, “Mr. Shackleton and Mr. Represent¬ 
ative Linton have gone to Saginaw and there will be nothing done until the 
return of Mr. Shackleton.” I asked him how that interfered with our having 
a hearing before the committee. Mr. Dakin had started along a couple of 
steps toward the front door. He turned and stepped back toward me and said, 
“I sent for Mr. Shackleton, or I spoke to Mr. Shackleton,” (I am not certain 
of the word he used there) “ to come down here, and he was expeeted to bring 
some money to put this bill through the House, but he did not bring any 
except seven dollars; he gave that to us and we have used it, but that don’t 
amount to anything and he has gone back to Saginaw to get some more money.”’ 
I said, “What do you want money for? Are there any expenses to pay?” and 
he said, “Yes; you know what I mean. We have got to have some money to 
put this through with.” I said, “Do you mean to say that you have got to 
use money with the committee?” 

He hesitated a moment and said “No, I think the committees are all 
right, but we have got to use some money among the members.” I said, 
“Do you think that the passage of measures can be promoted amongst the 
members of this house by the use of money ? ” He smiled and said, “ Why, 
of course it can.” That is all that occurs to me now that he said to me 
now. He then turned and went towards the front door. Mr. Fellows spoke 
to me and we stepped aside by the clock, where the electric clock stands, and 


O 


17 


Mr. Fellows spoke with me a minute, and then I came on up into the house. 

Q. Where was Mr. Smith at this time ? 

A. Mr. Smith stopped by us until about the time that Mr. Dakin turned 
towards the front door. It strikes me that some person came along to whom 
Mr, Smith spoke, and he started to come along. 

Q. Before the end of this conversation? 

A. Yes, sir, T think about the time Mr. Fellows and I stepped to one side 
was about the time Mr. Smith started to come along. 

Q. Where did you go after this conversation took place? 

A. I came up into the hall to speak with the chairman of the committee. 
It occurs to me now that Mr. Dakin said there would be no hearing until Mr. 
Shackleton returned. I then asked him if there had been an arrangement 
made with the committee for a postponement of the hearing? He said there 
had. I wanted to be entirely certain that there was no misunderstanding 
about it, and so I came up for the purpose of seeing the chairman, but I saw 
that the members were busy on the floor and I stopped but a few moments and 
went down. 

Q. Did you meet Mr. Dakin again that day? 

A. I did. 

Q. About what time? 

A. I should think about eleven o’clock or a little past. 

Q. Where did you meet him? 

A. As I said I went down from this building. As I got down to the cross¬ 
ing of Capitol avenue, I believe the street is called that goes from the build¬ 
ing down, and Michigan avenue, if I am right in the name of the street that 
crosses it, I saw on the opposite side of the street Mr. Recorder Crowley of the 
city of Saginaw, who came down with us that morning as one of the gentle¬ 
men, and Mr. Dakin and Mr. Fellows standing on the opposite corner. I 
crossed over to them and spoke to them a few words, then I made some fur¬ 
ther inquiry of Mr. Dakin about the charter. I think I asked him at that 
point what had taken place with reference to our charter since we were here 
on a former occasion. 

Q. Wbat answer did he make, if you remember? 

A. He immediately spoke of Mr. Shackleton’s going back to Saginaw for 
money. 

Mr. Holden—Tell us what he said. 

A. He said: Mr. Shackleton came down last night; he and Mr. Linton 
have been talking over about a compromise, and we need some money and he 
has gone back to Saginaw for them to consult the people there and to get some 
money.” There were a good many persons passing there at that time. I sup¬ 
pose around the corner in a space of 30 feet each side of us were perhaps 15 or 
20 persons passing one way or the other, and the four of us standing there were 
in the way of persons passing, and we stepped one side and moved along the 
length of the bank building. During that time I don’t remember that any¬ 
thing was said upon that subject. At the end of the bank building there is a 
restaurant, I think it is marked on the window the “Windsor,” and I think 
some one suggested that we go inside, I don’t remember which it was, I am 
certain it was not myself, but one of the party. We went inside. The front 
room was a small room, with a counter on one side, with candies and confec¬ 
tionery if I remember right, and back of that was a dining room with some 
tables; it was suggested that we sit down there and talk about the matter. 

3 


IS 


We went into one of those stalls and sat down by the table and resumeJ our 
conversation. 

Q. Who sat down at the table? 

A. Myself, Mr. Dakin, Mr. Fellows, Mr. Crowley—the four of us. 

Q. State the conversation that took place there? 

A. I then said : I would like to have you now tell me, Mr. Dakin, definitely, 

what you regard it necessary to do in regard to our bill.’’ He turned around 
towards me and said : “As I told you before, we never can get that bill 
through the House unless we have some money to do it with.” I inquired of 
him how much money he wanted or he needed—no, that was not the next in¬ 
quiry. The next inquiry 1 made of him was this: I said, “If we get a lavor- 
able report from the committee is there any doubt but that that report will be 
adopted by the House? ” He said, “There is no doubt of it if I can have 
what I need to do it with.” I said, “ How much have you an idea that you 
will need?” He said, “That I cannot tell until 1 begin to work; until I can¬ 
vass this matter some more.” He said, “Now, we were out last night; we were 
out until twelve or one o’clock with some of the boys, we were out with 
seven of them and we spent considerable money. There is four of them 
are all solid,” or words to that effect; he used the word “solid” and as 
to their being “all right.” Mr. Fellows took some part in the conversation. 
Shall I relate what Mr. Fellows said? 

Q. Yes. This was in the presence of Mr. Dakin ? 

A. Yes, sir; while we sat there at the table. 

Q. This was on the same day, the 19th, was it ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Here in the city of Lansing ? 

A. Yes, sir; Mr. Fellows remarked that he was promised some money be¬ 
fore he came down here, but no one gave him any money and he came with 
what he had in his pocket; that he had $32 in his pocket when he left home, 
he had paid his expenses and he had used it all up. This was on Tuesday, 
and he said that he came down on the morning tram Monday. I then asked 
Mr. Dakin how much money he had an idea he was going to need, and he 
replied as I stated, that he could not tell until he had made a canvass. 

Q. Did Mr. Fellows indicate in what manner he had spent that $32 at that 
time ? 

A. I don’t think he did while he were sitting by the table. 

Q. What did Dakin say in reply to your question how much money he was 
going to need ? 

A. That he could not tell until he began to work, until he had made some 
further canvass in the matter. He said that Mayor Shackelton had promised 
to telegraph them down some money as soon as he got home, that they could 
not commence work until they got some money, because if they should go to 
a man and talk with him and promise him some money—he didn’t say 
“promise him some money,” he said “make any promise to him.” 

Mr. Van Zile—Supposing you make the correction so that the House can hear 
it. 

He said, “If we should go to a man and talk with him and make him any 
promise, and then for any reason 1 would fail to get the money, he would 
be disappointed, and he would go back on us, and it would hurt us rather than 
help us,” and so they could not commence doing any work until they got the 
money. I then said, “Is this a prudent thing to be talking about the use 




19 


of money in this way?” He said “Yes; you gentlemen don’t need to be 
known in the matter, at all; you furnish the money to me; or if you don’t 
want to trust me, you can give it to Mr. Fellows and I will attend to 
the rest of it.” I said, “What do you propose to do with it; how do you pro¬ 
pose to use it?” He said, “Well, I am pretty well acquainted with a good 
many here. Now, there is a large number (I think thirty-four was the num¬ 
ber stated), of Grand Army men here that are members, and I am pretty well 
acquainted with them, and so is Mr. Fellows. I will go and see any one of 
them that I deem proper, and talk with him, and if I think I can use some 
money with him I will make an appointment for him to meet Mr. Fellows, then 
I will see Mr. Fellows and Mr. Fellows will give him what I think is proper.” 
I asked how many members there were—or at this point I said, “Is this cus¬ 
tomary, when a bill is pending here, do members expect to be seen in this way?” 
He said, “ Why, of course they do.” 

I again pressed the inquiry how many there were of those that he would want 
to see. He said that there were a good many of these Grand Army men and 
there were a good many Democrats loo that were not Grand Army men, and 
he could not tell until he had canvassed the matter. I said, “Suppose you 
name them over and let us see.” He commenced very thoughtfully and men¬ 
tioned, I think, about two names, I do not recollect who they were, that he 
wanted to see, and he hesitated. I pressed the inquiry some more as to the 
number, and he did not seem to make any progress in stating the number. I 
then thought of a roll call that I had in my pocket and I took that out. 

Q. Mr. Eaton, do you recognize this communication ? 

A. I do, sir. 

Q. Is that a communication made by you to this House ? 

A. That is a communication that I made to the Speaker. 

Q. Do you recognize this roll call? 

A. That is the roll call I allude to. 

Q. Thgit is the one you took out of your pocket at that time ? 

A. Yes, sir. 


20 


The following is a copy of the roll call submitted in evidence in this case 
and marked as an exhibit therein: 


A.S. NAYS. 

Jones, 

Ir. Abbott, 

Kallander, 

- Allen, - 

Kelley, 

Anderson, 

Killean, 

Ashton, 

Kirby, 

— Baker, S., — 5 

Lakey, 

Baker, W. A., 

Lincoln, 

—Baldwin,-5 

Linton, 

Bardwell, 

Makelim, 

Bates, 

Manly,-10 

Baumgardner, 

McCormick, — 5 • 

—Beecher, 

McGregor, 

Bettinger, 

McKie, 

—Bently, -5 

McMillan, 

Breen, 

Mulvey, 

Brock, 

Ogg, 

—Burr, - 5 

O’Keefe,-5 

Cady, 

Oviatt, 

Cannon, 

Pardee, 

Case, 

Perkins, — 10 

Chamberlain, 

Pettit, 

Chapell, 

Pierce, 

Chapman, 

Powers, 

Cole, 

Preston, 

—Crocker —10 

Keader, 

Cross, 

Eentz, 

Dakin, 

Kobinson, J. W., 

Damon, 

Eobinson, E., 

Dickson, 

Eogers, 

— Diekema, — 10 

Eounsville, 

Dillon, 

Eumsey, —25 

Dougherty, 

Simpson, 

Douglass, 

Snow, 

Dunbar — 5 

Spencer, 

Eldred, 

Stuart, 

Engleman, -5 

Thompson, 

Goodrich, 

Tindall, 

Green, 

Van Orth wick. 

Grennell, 

Vick ary. 

Harper, 

Vroman, 

Haskin, 

Washburn, 

Herrington,-10 

Watson, F. H., 

Hill, — 

Watson, H., 

Hoaglin, 

Watts, 

Holt, 

Webber, 

Hoobler, 

Wellman, 

Hosford, 

Williams, T. H.,-10 

Houk, 

Williams, W. W., 

Hunt, 

Wilson, 


_Wood, 





21 


The Speaker—This question has been handed up: Did Mr. Dakin men¬ 
tion any names that he was out with the night before that were “solid 
A. He did not. 

The Speaker then announced in accordance with the rule, that the House 
would stand at recess until 2 o’clock P. M, 


AFTERNOON SESSION. 


2 6^ clock P, M. 

The House met and was called to order by the Speaker. 

The investigation of the charges against Representative Dakin was then 
resumed. 

The Speaker—The committee on the part of the House will proceed with 
the examination of the witness, and the members will please give attention. 

Frederick L. Eaton recalled. 

Examination resumed by Mr. Diekema: 

Q. At the close of the session this morning you stated that at the time you 
were together there in this stall you took out a roll call from your pocket. 
Will you go on and continue the conversation that took place at that time? 
Narrate it. 

A. After Mr. Dakin made such slow progress in naming the parties 
whom he wanted to see, I took out this roll call and commenced reading the 
names over myself. Mr. Dakin sat at my left. 

Q. (Showing witness a roll call.) This is the roll call, is it ? 

A. This is the roll call. As I read the names he would say, “Now, such a 
man I shall want to see.” 

Mr. Holden—Tell us what he said. Do not give us your construction. 
Give the names of the persons. 

A. As I read the second name—the second name that I read, Mr. Allen— 
he said, “ There is a man I shall want to see.” I passed along down until I 
came to Mr. Baker, and he mentioned Mr. Baker. At the same time he took 
hold of the side of the roll call and as he went along mentioning the names 
I tried to keep count of them. When I had got along down so that I had 
counted about seven names, some conversation took place which I do not re¬ 
member, but which made me lose the count. 

I then said, “Mr. Dakin take your pencil and check those names which 
you want to see.” He took a pencil and commenced checking, and after he 
had checked two or three upon the left hand side he said, “This roll call has 
already been checked before.” I said, “Make a different mark then.” He 
looked it down and he said, “There are no marks on the right hand side and 
I will check it on that side.” So he commenced again and went through 
and checked it, during which time I don’t remember that there was any con¬ 
versation about this matter. He then counted the names that he had 
checked and said, “ There are seventeen that ought to be seen, and there may 
be others;I can’t tell about that till I get to work.” I then said, “What is 
your idea of the amount that you are going to use with each one? ” He said, 
“Some I should give more and some less. That will depend on circum¬ 
stances.” T then said, “Putdown the amounts which you think you would 



22 


wish to use and let us make an estimate of this.” He took the pencil and 
went over the list again, occasionally making some remark. 

I do not recall any of the conversation until he came to the name of Rep¬ 
resentative Rumsey. He says there is a man that I shall have to give as 
much as ;|^25 to secure. Mr. Crowley remarked that he had on a former occa¬ 
sion been introduced to him, and that Mr. Rumsey was a very able man. That 
was about the only remark that Mr. Orcwley made during the checking and 
marking. I then took the list and added it up and said, “That amounts to 
$126.” He said yes, and undoubtedly there will be others that I shall want ta 
see in addition to that. About this time, in the adjoining room, I think, they 
began to go in to dinner, or else there was a call to dinner, and some remarked 
it is dinner time, and we got up and started out. When we got up I had the 
roll-call in my hands. I turned around to get my hat, which was on the floor, 
and as I turned back Mr. Dakin had taken the roll call and pnt it into his 
pocket. I paused a moment and I said, “Mr. Dakin, let me see that paper 
again.” He took it out and I looked at it a moment while he waited for me 
and then folded it up and put it into my pocket, and that ended that inter¬ 
view. 

Q. How did you happen to have that roll call in your pocket ? 

A. I had it in my pocket for at least a month. On a former occasion, I 
think it was the second time the Saginaw deputation was here to see about the 
charter, and they had been here, I think it was the eighth time. We found 
that the hearing was postponed, and we were standing in the back part of thi& 
room. There was Mr. Jerome, ex-Senator Foot, Col. Little, Mr. Crowley and 
one or two other gentlemen and myself. It was suggested that inasmuch as 
we were not to have a hearing that day and we could not get away until night, 
that we busy ourselves by calling upon such members as we were personally 
acquainted with and see if there was a feeling of opposition to the charter, as 
had been represented, or what the feeling was. Each one to see his acquaint¬ 
ances personally, and the inquiry was made as to whom each one was ac¬ 
quainted with. 

I could not recall, although I knew I was acquainted with several, I could 
not recall their names. Ex-Senator Foote sent for a manual, said we would 
look at a list of the names. Col. Little suggested that the most convenient 
thing was to get some copies of the roll call, and I think he sent a boy to the 
clerk’s desk, or some other place, and he came back with half a dozen or more 
copies, and each of us took a copy and looked it over. After we had looked 
them over we put them into our pockets. Mine had remained in my pocket 
from that time until the time I speak of. 

The Speaker—The following question has been handed to me to put to the 
witness: 

Q. How did it come that Mr. Dakin did not name any amount opposite Mr. 
Allen’s name ? 

A. That name, and at least one other name, I saw that he checked he did 
not place any figures after. No reason was assigned. No remark was made 
about it. 

Q. Will you explain how these checks happened to come on the left hand 
side. There are other checks, are there not? 

A. Yes, sir. When that roll call was first handed to me I took my pencil 
and as I ran down the names I ran down to see if it was a full roll call of the 
House, that is, if the roll call was full, and I made a check every ten names. 


23 


and I think those were all of the checks that were on the roll call at the time 
I handed it to Mr. Dakin. Mr. Dakin commenced checking it on tho left 
hand side and he made all of the checks except the checks here at the end of 
each ten names. Those checks between each ten names were made when the 
roll call was first put into my hands a month ago. 

Q. You say you were in a restaurant and a sort of saloon. Was there any 
liquor used at that time by any of you? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State how much and what, and by whom was it used? 

A. A little before I took the roll call, the landlord of the place, I suppose, 
came to the door and looked in a moment and said, “ G-entlemen. can I do any¬ 
thing for you ?^’ Mr. Crowley said, “Yes, let us have something,’’ and some¬ 
one said, “ What will you take, what will you take ?” and each of us named, 
the beverage of our choice and it was brought in. 

Mr. Holden—Tell what was said. 

A. Mr. Dakin was the first one. He said he would take some sour wine. I 
think I was the next I said I would take some whisky. Mr. Crowley said he 
would take some whisky and Mr. Fellows took whisky. The landlord re¬ 
marked, “Three whiskies and one sour wine,” and went away and brought 
them in. That was all the liquor that was used. 

Q. Did you have any subsequent talk with Mr. Dakin? 

A. I do not now recall that I had any further talk. 

Conductor Diekema—I now desire to offer this roll call in evidence and) 
have it marked as an exhibit in this case. 

Judge Van Zile—I object to the intioduction of this list upon the ground 
that there is a variance between the proof and the allegation in these specific 
articles. If there is any specific article that is here charged against this man 
Dakin under which this could possibly be admitted it is the third, and the alle¬ 
gation in the third specific article is that on the 19th day of April he made a list 
of names of certain members of the said House of Representatives of the State of 
Michigan, together with the amount of money necessary to procure evidence 
and influence of each of said members, etc., setting out the list as follows: 
Baker, |5, etc. The piece of proof that they undertake to introduce under 
that specific article is simply a list of printed names that was never made by 
Dakin. There is no pretense that he made them, but some check-marks op~ 
posite some printed names. 

1 do not know how far we are to be governed by the rules that would govern 
in a court of justice, but certainly that piece of proof could not possibly be ad¬ 
mitted in any court of justice under such a charge as that. Therefore, I say 
it IS a variance, and it is very apparent: First, this does not proven nor is it 
pretended that Mr. Dakin made any list. He simply checked opposite names 
that were already printed in a list; second, there is not any mark of dollars or 
anything to indicate what the figures mean, whereas in the specific articles 
they charge that he made a list with the amount of dollars opposite each name 
and that he made the list. I say that is a variance, and these gentlemen 
ought to charge what they propose to prove or else they should not be per¬ 
mitted to prove it. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—Mr. Speaker, m the first place I propose that no 
gentleman would see any difference between making a list originally and writ¬ 
ing out the names and making figures opposite names that were already 
printed. There certainly can be no distinction there whatever. A list of 


24 


names is just the same as a list of names whether I write or mark a figure op¬ 
posite the name or whether I write the figure upon a printed list. So much 
for the first objection made by the gentleman. The second objection is that 
these figures although corresponding have no dollar mark before them. Mr. 
Speaker, we have proved by the gentleman that these figures represented dol¬ 
lars ; that he has stated that when 25 was written opposite Mr. Rumsey’s he 
said it would take at least twenty-five dollars. 

Mr. Dodge—What witness do you refer to? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—To Mr. Eaton. He has sworn that Dakin said 
it would take at least twenty-five dollars to purchase Rumsey, and the whole 
matter when footed up amounts to $125, and no other calculation than to 
figure these figures as representing dollars will make it foot $125. It seems 
to me the objection is very trivial and not well taken. 

Mr. Van Zile—That is a very handsome way no doubt of disposing of the 
objection; that is very trivial. The list of names that is introduced is a list of 
•all the members of this House. The list of names that is charged is a list of 
some twelve names. The proof is that we did not make the list, nor is it pre¬ 
tended that we made the list. We merely checked over a list that was already 
made. The specific charges are, that in that list that they proposed to intro¬ 
duce here are figures and dollar marks. The list that they introduce has 
nothing of the kind. By the sixth rule that this honorable body has adopted 
for the trial of this case, All the rules, legal and usual, governing cases of 
law in courts,” shall govern this case. 

The Speaker—The chair is of the opinion that the testimony had better be 
received. 

The witness—I wish to make one coirection. In reply to a question whether 
I had any further conversation with Mr. Dakin, I did not recall the conversa¬ 
tion which was had at which I was present in the Speaker’s room on the fol¬ 
lowing day, in the presence of fifteen of these gentlemen—if that was intended 
to be covered. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—I did not intend to cover that. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

By Mr. Dodge: 

Q. How long have you been practicing law? 

A. Something over 20 years. 

•Q. You are how old ? 

A. Fifty one years. 

•Q. What .official positions have you held? 

A. The first office I ever held was a member of the House of Representatives 
of the State of J^ew Hampshire in the year 1860. 

Q. And you held that for one term? 

A. One term. 

Q. Won’t you give us a history of yourself from that time until you came 
to Saginaw, what you did. 

A. I held the office of Representative, that was immediately after I came 
from college. 

Q. You were how old at that time? 

A. I was born in 1835, and that was in 1860. I was 25 years old. That 
same year I came to Michigan. I stopped in Lenawee county, in the village 
of Blissfield. I had charge of the school there for about the five following 


25 


years, during which time I read law, was admitted to the bar and commenced 
practice in Blissfield. About 1865 or 1866 I came to Saginaw. 

Q. You have lived there ever since? 

A. I have lived there ever since. 

Q. I think you stated this morning, on your direct examination, that the 
first oflSce you held in Saginaw City was that of justice of the peace. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long did you hold that office? 

A. 1 think it was eight years. 

Q. How long had you been in Saginaw before you were elected to the office 
of justice of the peace? 

A. It was the following spring. 

Q. On what ticket? 

A. On the Democratic ticket. 

Q. How long did you hold the office of justice of the peace ? 

A. I think it was about eight years, and I don’t recollect, it is possible that 
the first time I was elected it was to fill a vacancy, and it might not have been 
quite eight years. 

Q. What was the next office that you held ? 

A. At the same time I was elected several times as supervisor of my ward. 

Q. On what ticket ? 

A. On the Democratic ticket. 

Q. How many times did your represent your ward on the board of super¬ 
visors ? 

A. I think I was elected from my ward at least twice, possibly three times. 
I was then appointed controller of the city, and by virtue of being controller 
was ex-officio a member of the board of supervisors. I have held that position 
by appointment once since. 

Q. What was the next office, aside from justice of the peace and controller, 
that you held in Saginaw City ? 

A. I had been on the board of health, if you would call that an office, for 
about fifteen years, and have been president of the board for about twelve 
years. 

Q. What office have you held in Saginaw City other than those? 

A. A year ago I was appointed city attorney and held that office during the 
present year. 

Q. Are you still city attorney? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you re-appointed city attorney at Saginaw City? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you nominated as city attorney by Mayor Hill during the latter 
part of his administration as mayor of Saginaw City? 

A. He nominated me. 

Q. You were nominated, but were you elected by the council ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was Mr. Fellows a member of the council at that time ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was Mr. Shackleton, the present mayor of Saginaw City, a member of 
the council at that time ? 

A. Yes, sir; may I explain? 

Q. When I want you to. Did you have any trouble about your confirma¬ 
tion. 


4 


26 


Q, Did you make any effort in connection with your confirmation with the 
board of aldermen ? 

A. No, sir; I never asked an alderman nor any party to nominate or vote for 
me in my life. 

Q. Was any one nominated after the council rejected your nomination by 
Mayor Hill ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you still hold tbe office of city attorney ? 

A. I did. 

Q. Who was your successor as city attorney? 

A. Frank E. Emerick. 

Q. Frank E. Emerick is the present incumbent of that office ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who sent his name in; have you means of knowing? 

A. I was not present, but it was since Mayor Shackleton was mayor. 

Q. When was that? 

A. Sometime in April; it was since the spring election. 

Q. Have you any means of knowing how Mr. Shackleton and Mr. Fellows 
voted on your confirmation? 

A. I don’t remember. I cared so little about it that I paid no attentino 
to it. 

Q. Do you say that you do not know how they voted? 

A. I think they both voted against my confirmation. 

Q. Don’t you know it without any guess work or thought about it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Why didn’t you answer the question when I asked you before ? 

A. I did not recall the fact. 

Q. You have just recalled it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the salary of city attorney of Saginaw City during your ad¬ 
ministration ? % 

A. Five hundred dollars a year. 

Q. And you did not regard it as worth seeking a re-nomination or re-elec¬ 
tion CO that office, did you? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. How long did you hold the office after the council had rejected your 
nomination, or refused to confirm your nomination? 

A. Until my successor was appointed and qualified. 

Q. How long was that? 

A. About a month, from the first of March to the first of April, it was a 
month and nine or eleven days. 

Q. Since then Mr. Shackleton has become the mayor? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When was he inaugurated mayor ? 

A. Immediately after election, I think about the 9th or 7th of April. 

Q. By what party? 

A. The Democratic party. 

Q. What party are you a member of ? 

A. The Democratic party. 

Q. And have been all your lifetime? 

A. Yes, sir. 


27 


Q. How many political parties are there in the Sag^inaw valley to your 
knowledge ? = j j 

A. I think there were at le^st four in the field at the late election. 

A. What are they ? 

A. There was a democratic ticket, a republicau ticket, a union labor ticket, 
a prohibition ticket and a citizens’ ticket—there were five tickets. 

Q. How long have you been interested in the amendments of the city charter 
that have been before the Legislature? 

A. 1 was one of a committee. 

Q. Answer the question, please. 

A. About six months. 

Q. What reason did you have for interesting yourself in the city charter ? 

A. I was one of a committee appointed for the revision of the charter. 

Q. Mayor Hill was chairman of the committee ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who drafted the charter? 

A. Different parts of it were drafted by different members of the committee. 
I drafted that part of it which pertains to special assessments, street openings 
and some other titles. 

Q. Can you state what amendments the city of Saginaw was desirous of 
having the Legislature make in its city charter? 

A. Most particularly those with reference to special assessments and street 
opening; also make the city attorney a member of the board of supervisors. 
Those were the prominent points that were called to mind at the time the com¬ 
mittee was appointed. 

Q. It was finally prepared and sent to Lansing, was it not ? 

A. It was. 

Q. When did you first visit Lansing in the interest of the city charter ? 

A. About the latter part or middle of March, I should say. 

Q. The middle of last March ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long did you remain here ? 

A. I think I went home the same day. 

Q. Did you come down here then in your official capacity for the city, or 
did you come down here then, let me ask, as a private citizen? 

A. I came at the request of Mayor Hill and the controller of the city. 

Q, Who defrayed your entire expenses? 

A. The city of Saginaw. That is, after we had been down here four or five 
times a bill was made out for the personal expenses of each one and was called 
to my attention, and my attention amongst others were paid by council—$15.50 
for four trips. 

Q. That covered your entire expenses for four trips? 

A. My entire charges and expenses for four trips? 

Q. What was the arrangement made with you when you came down here in 
behalf of this committee or of the mayor regarding your expenses? 

A. Nothing was said. 

Q. Did you have any assurance from any one that your expenses would be 
paid? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You took that responsibility? 

A. Yes, sir. 


28 


Q. For what reason? 

A. I never in my life asked who was going to pay me for my necessary ex¬ 
penses in the discharge of an official duty that I i^call. 

Q, Then you came in an official capacity? 

A. I understood that being city attorney, when called upon by the mayor 
and controller to assist them in any work, that it was an official duty for me 
to attend to it. 

Q. You came down here you say and the four trips cost you something over 
$15.00? 

A. $15.50. 

Q. Did you present aa itemized statement of your expenditures for those 
four trips to the mayor? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Can you tell us what those expenditures consisted of? The expenditures 
consisted of money probably, but what for—for what purpose? 

A. The railroad fare from Saginaw here and return is at the present time 
$3.35. I think it varied a little at that time. The rate I don’t recall. Then 
the hotel bills—I stopped at the Hudson House, and I think they charged us 
two dollars a day, or at that rate. 

Q. How many days did you stop at the Hudson House? 

A. I suppose that I was there altogether may be three or four days. 
Some days when we came down in the morning and went back at night, 
we only stopped there atdinner. 

Q. Before your term of office expired, how many times did I understand you 
to say you had been down here in the interest of the city charter ? 

A. I should think three or four times. 

Q. And how many times since ? Correct yourself, if you desire, in that re¬ 
gard. 

A. Perhaps, strictly speaking, the year for which I was appointed would ex¬ 
pire the 1st of March. Up to the 1st of March I don’t think I had been down 
here at all. I think it was sometime in March when I came down first, so 
that perhaps it is correct to say that before the year expired had not been here 
at all. 

Q. You were still acting in an official capacity ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many times were there during the time that you held your official 
position that you were down here in the interest of the city charter ? 

A. I think there were four trips for which the city allowed the expenses of 
the committee, and I believe we were here once or twice since. 

Q. Then you have been down here altogether in the interest of the city 
charter five or six times ? 

A. Eight times, I believe. 

Q. Now if you were down four times during your official position you have 
been down here four times since? 

A. I presume so. 

Q. Does that include the present time? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You have been done here nine times ; eight times with reference to the 
charter and once since, on this occasion, is that correct? 

A. Yes, sir; I have been here that number of times this winter. 

Q. More than that? 


29 


A. I donH recall that I have been here more than that. 

Q. For what purpose did you come down here after your term of office had 
expired ; was it with reference to this charter? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. At whose solicitation, if anybody’s, did you come then? 

A. At the personal solicitation of the controller. 

Q. Who was he? 

A. Mr. William Binder. 

Q. The first time you came at his solicitation? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. The first time after your official position had expired? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And then the next time, which would be the sixth trip down here, at 
whose instance did you come then? 

A. No one’s except the chairman of the committee, Col. 0. D. Little. 

Q. What interest had Col. C. D. Little in the charter? 

A. He was appointed by the common council after we had come to an un¬ 
derstanding about matters so that it was understood. 

Q. Who had come to an understanding? 

A. After we had come to an understanding between the committee that had 
been down here and Representative Dakin, and some parties that he repre¬ 
sented, or that were jointly represented with him. 

Q. Who were the parties that were jointly represented with him that you 
speak of? 

A. They were, gentlemen who represented the Labor Union party of Sag¬ 
inaw. 

Q. How many of them to your knowledge were interesed in this matter? 

A. I remember seeing two of the gentlemen here, Mr. Joseph Saunders and 
Mr. James Roach, of Saginaw. 

Q. Any others? , 

A. I do not now recall seeing others. 

Q. Of whom did your committee consist aside from yourself and Mr. Little, 
its chairman? 

A. Mr. Little was appointed by a resolution to take charge of the looking 
after it, with instructions to invite such gentlemen to assist him as he saw fit. 
Q. That resolution was passed by whom? 

A. By the common council. 

Q. Did Mr. Little employ you then? 

A. Mr. Little came to my office and urged me to come down. 

Q. When was that? 

A. It was since the spring election. 

Q. This last year? 

A. Yes, sir; since the April election. 

Q. Can you give us about the date? 

A. Oh, I should think it was within a day or two after election. 

Q. The election was on the 4th day of April, was it not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And it was, you think, the 5th or 6th of April? 

A. About that time. 

Q. That was the sixth trip on which you had been down here, was it? 

A. I cannot say. 


30 


Q. Who interested you in coming down here on the occasion of your sixth 
visit here? 

A. I cannot specifically call those visits the sixth or other visits, because I 
have no memorandum of it. 

Q. You say on the occasion of your fifth visit you came down here at the 
solicitation of the controller, Mr. Binder. Now can you tell the Speaker and 
the House at whose solicitation you came down on the next trip ? 

‘^A. I think it was with reference to the same trip that Mr. Binder saw me 
that Mr. Little also came to the office and saw me. I explained to them that 
my duties as city attorney had terminated and that I thought they ought to 
invite the present city attorney in my place. 

Q. You are a lawyer, are you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Don’t you know that I did not ask you anything of that kind ? 

A. I am trying to answer your question. 

Mr. Dodge—Will the reporter read the question and the answer? 

The official reporter read as follows: 

“ Q. You say on the occasion of your fifth visit you came down here at the 
solicitation of the controller, Mr. Binder. Now can you tell the Speaker and 
the House at whose solicitation you came down on the next trip?” 

A. I think it was with reference to the same trip that Mr. Binder saw me 
that Mr. Little also came to the office and saw me. I explained to them that 
my duties as city attorney had terminated and that I thought they ought to 
invito the prosent city attorney in my place.” 

Q. That is correct is it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You came here then on the sixth trip at the solicitation of Mr. Little 
and the city controller? 

A. Whether it was the sixth trip or some other one 1 cannot say. 

Q. That is the one we are talking about. I have asked you about the 5th. 

A. I think it was at the instance of the city controller. 

Q. You specified the 5th trip. The 6th would be the next one? 

A. I don’t remember the 6th trip, nor any other trip by number. 

Q. At whose instance did you come down here on the last visit to Lansing, 
the 8th trip. That would be the last, would it not? 

A. No arrangement had been made except the hearing was postponed that 
we came down to attend to. On the day to which it was postponed— 

Q. Let me ask you, you are now talking about the last trip down? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. That is what I am asking you about. I asked you at whose solicitation 
you came down on the occasion of your last trip ? 

A. At the solicitation of Mr. Little and Mr. Binder, at the time they came 
to see me previous to that. 

Q. Previous to what? 

A. Previous to that day that we came. 

Q. On your last visit here? 

A. No, sir. It might have been the fifth or sixth time we came here. 

Q. Will you be kind enough to state at whose instance you came the last 
tim e ? 

A. At the instance of Mr. Binder and Mr. Little, as I have stated. 

Q. Now, will you give the House to understand at whose instance you made 
the trip before that? 


31 


A. At their iastance, as I have explained, at the time they came to me at my 
office. 

Q. On the occasion before that; the same gentlemen? 

A. They were never to see me but once. 

Q. But you say you came down here on these several occasions at their in¬ 
stance? 

A. If you will allow me to explain I will give my understanding of how I 
came at their request. 

Q. I would be pleased to have you. 

A. Mr. Binder came to my office; requested me to come down, said he had 
a dispatch I think from Dakin to send down somebody to look after it. I 
made the objection that my term of office had expired, and he ought to get 
the present city attorney to come. 

Q. When was this, please ? 

A. This was sometime after election; sometime after the appointment of 
Mr. Emerick, I believe. In fact, I know it was. He said that he had seen 
Governor Jerome and requested him to come; that Governor Jerome had di¬ 
rected him to come and see me as the party who had assisted in the prepara¬ 
tion of the charter, and the only person who knew the details and merits of 
it, and insisted upon me coming, and he came and urged me to come, Mr. 
Little came on that same occasion and had an interview with me. I made the 
same objection to him. He stated to me that Mayor Hill, who was chairman 
of the committee that prepared it, was now absent from the city; that 
Mr. Dickson, the controller, who aided in preparing it, was now absent from 
the city, and I was the only one remaining who had taken an active, working 
part in the drafting and preparing of the charter, and really knew the merits 
of it, or the provisions of it. 

Q. And for that reason he wanted you to come down here ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Whom did he tell you was to pay your expenses? 

A. Nothing whatever was said about expenses or compensation. 

Q. Have you at any time received any pay by way of compensation for 
ooming down here since the paying of the fifteen dollars and some cents you 
first spoke about ? 

A. No sir. 

Q. You have been defraying your own expenses since? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With no promise of pay or future reward ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What promise of pay or future reward have you had? 

A. I answered your question in the affirmative. I meant to say that it is 
without any express promise from any person that I should be rewarded for 
it. 

Q. Simply an implied understanding that you will receive your pay ? 

A. I expect that the city will defray the money that I have disbursed in ex¬ 
penses. 

Q. How far do you think the city will pay your expenses ? How much 
have they been? Have you any means of knowing? 

A. My judgment is that up to the present time I have expended perhaps 
fifteen or twenty dollars in coming and going; perhaps not more than twelve 
or fifteen. 


32 


Q. On your several trips down here have you met various members of the 
Legislature? 

A. I have. 

Q. Have you undertaken to become acquainted with them ? 

A. No, sir; except as I have casually been introduced to them them the last 
three or four times that I have been here. 

Q. Have you formed acquaintance in the present Legislature among tha 
members? 

A. I have. 

Q. How many of them, perhaps? 

A. Perhaps six or ten. 

Q. Will you be kind enough to state their names? 

A. I don’t know that I can. 

Q. Do the best you can. 

A. I might by referring to the roll call. 

Q. (Handing witness a roll call.) Here is a roll call. 

A. I remember Mr. Green, of Bay City. I have been introduced to quite a 
number of the members, I suppose— 

Q. (Interrupting.) Six or ten? 

A. I suppose I have been introduced to thirty or forty members, most of 
whom I never have spoken to since. 

Q. You have become acquaint'' .vith six or ten, I understand you to say? 

A. I believe so. 

Q. Mr. Green is the first? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you first become acquainted with Mr. Green? 

A. The first time I was here. In fact I knew him before. He lives at Bay 
City. 

Q. Didn’t you know him before? 

A. I should not have recognized him. 

Q. He is somewhat disfigured, but you would not have recognized him? 

A. I don’t think I should. 

Q. Don’t you know that you did know him for years in the Saginaw valley? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you say you did not know him? 

A. I say I don’t recall having any personal acquaintance with him until I 
came here. 

Q. Don’t you know that Mr. Green has been engaged in the lumber business 
for years in the Saginaw valley and formerly resided in Saginaw? 

A. I think his name is familiar to me, but I don’t think I had a personal 
acquaintance with him before I met him here. 

Q. Who introduced you to Mr. Green here? 

A. I met him at the Eichele House. I think Senator Wisner introduced us. 
Either Senator Wisner or perhaps Mr. Dakin. I stopped there the first night 
I was here and found him stopping there. 

Q. You stopped at the Eichele House the first night you were here? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then on your several visits here you have not gone back on the evening 
of the morning you came into the city? 

A. I stopped over night sometimes. 

Q. Is that true? 


33 


A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now go on. You have mentioned Mr. Green, and you say there are sev¬ 
eral other members whom you have met. 

A. The members of the committee on municipal corporations I have met 
every time I have been here ; have become well enough acquainted with them 
so that I think I could call them by name; also the committee on labor inter¬ 
ests, the most of them, who have been present the several times that we have 
been here; I have met them. 

Q. Have you talked with those several gentlemen on each occasion you have 
been here with reference to your city charter? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What I want to know is this—To whom have you gone personally with 
reference to your city charter, when you have been down here on these several 
visits? 

A. Aside from the two committees? 

Q. 1 want you now to give the individual members; either of the commit¬ 
tees of the House? 

A. I have not had a word of conversation, that I now recall, with the mem¬ 
bers of either of these two committees, except when those committees were in 
session—that is, with reference to our charter. 

Q. Have you talked with any one not a member of those committees with 
reference to your city charter, and if so, to whom? 

A. I talked with Senator Wisner about it. 

Q. Was he a member of the House? 

A. No, sir; of the Senate. 

Q. We are talking about members of the House. 

A. I have had conversation with several of the members that I have stated. 

Q. Now give us some of the individuals—their names. 

A. Mr. McGregor. 

Q. Who else ? 

A. Mr. Snow. 

Q. Who else ? 

A. Mr. Jerome, and I had a conversation- 

Q. Never mind Mr. Jerome. Just members whom you had a conversation 
with. 

A. I cannot say that he mentioned it, but Mr. Jerome- 

Q. Never mind. I want to know whom you had a conversation with. While 
you are thinking about that, what did you have to say to Mr. -Snow. He is 
from Saginaw ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did you have to say with him ? 

A. I discussed it with him coming down on the cars one time. 

Q. You came down here to Lansing to see him ? 

A. No, I came down here to go before the committee on municipal corpo¬ 
rations. 

Q. How long ago was it that you had a conversation with Mr. Snow ? 

A. On one of the several occasions when I was coming down. 

Q. How long ago, probably? 

A. Probably a month ago. 

Q. McGregor is from Saginaw county, too ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

5 



34 


Q. What did you have to say to him? 

A. I spoke to him about our charter. I asked him if there was any doubt 
in his mind that whatever report was made by the committee would be 
adopted by the House without any difficulty. He said there was no doubt 
whatever. 

Q. When was that ? 

A. That was a month ago. That was the second time I was down here. 

Q. What other members had you talked with aside from McGregor and 
Snow from your county? 

A. I cannot recall the names of others. But very few. 

Q. Can you point out a single member here? 

A. Ho, sir, I cannot. 

Q. You don’t remember the name of a single individual and you cannot see 
one in your presence that you had a conversation with in reference to the city 
charter? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Are there any absent from the House that you had a conversation with? 

A. Not that I would say to-day that I had a conversation with. 

Q. How many times have you gone before the several committees with ref¬ 
erence to your charter? 

A. Every time I have been here. 

Q. Had a meeting and a hearing? 

A. No, for upon one pretext or another the hearing has been postponed 
from the first time we came here until we had a final hearing on the morning 
of the 20th. 

Q. The first hearing you had was on the morning of the 20th of April, and 
you have been here six or seven times before that for the purpose of getting a 
hearing. Is that correct? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You say upon one pretext or another. What were those pretexts? 

A. When I first came down we had learned that the bill had been intro¬ 
duced into this House. 

Q. Who had learned that? 

A. I had learned it myself. I will say that previous to that I had seen Mr. 
Dakin and requested him to give notice of the introduction of a bill to amend 
or revise the charter of the city of Saginaw. He said he would do it. After¬ 
wards I called his attention to it again and he said he had done it. At the 
same time I told him- 

Q. Can you state about when this was ? 

A. This was about the 19th of February. I told him that the charter was 
prepared and the controller would give it to him to bring down. He said ho 
would bring it down and introduce it. 

Q. What you wanted him to do at that time was to introduce a skeleton bill? 

A. No; I desired that he would introduce a bill which we had been three 
months preparing, and which was then perfect and complete, to revise the 
charter of the city of Sagainaw. 

Q. He had the bill in his possession then ? 

A. No; the bill was in the hands of the controller and the controller had 
been instructed to deliver it to him. 

Q. You did not expect him to introduce the bill until he received it ? 

A. No, sir; he was in the city of Saginaw and I spoke to him about going 
to the controller’s office to get the bill and he said he would get it. 


35 


Q. Has that anything to do with the pretexts we were speaking about, post¬ 
poning this from time to time ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Please explain it then. 

A. A few days after that I saw in the Legislative proceedings that the bill 
to revise the charter of the city of Saginaw had been introduced, and on motion 
of Mr. Dakin had been laid cn the table. I had requested him to have the bill 
referred to the proper committee so that we might appear before that commit¬ 
tee and have a hearing, as we knew there would be opposition to at least two 
features of that bill by neighboring corporations. 

Q. Whom do you mean by neighboring corporations? 

A. The city of East Saginaw, a city across the river, and the township of 
Oarrolton, which joins Saginaw on the north. 

Q. Did you think there would be any opposition from any other source? 

A. No, sir. After the bill was laid upon the table the next reference that I 
■saw in regard to it was that the bill to revise the charter of the city or Saginaw 
bad passed the House. 

Q. You have explained pretext No. 1. Now is this pretext No 2? 

A. I will briefly explain that. 

Q. Please. 

A. Mr. Dakin was interviewed with reference to this bill. We also saw from 
the record that the bill had gone to the Senate and had been referred to the 
committee on cities and villages. We learned from Representative Linton of 
East Saginaw that the bill— 

Q. You learned from him, or somebody else learned from him? 

A. Somebody else learned from him. The city officers of the city of Sagi¬ 
naw— 

Q. That is hearsay. Do not give that. 

A. I will say that we discovered— 

Q. Who discovered? 

A. I discovered myself that the bill which had passed the House was not 
the bill which we had prepared. 

Q. What bill was it that had passed the House? 

A. It was a bill of amendments to the charter of the city of Saginaw that 
had been prepared by the labor union men of Saginaw. 

Q. And that one you were opposed to? 

A. That we were opposed to, 

Q. What has that got to do with your coming down here and the delay of 
your being given a hearing before these committees? 

A. I am just coming to that. This bill being referred to the committee on 
cities and villages of the Senate, a time was appointed for a hearing. Several 
of os came down. I did not come that time. That was the first time. They 
came home and no hearing was had. I do not know what the difficulty was, 
but a hearing had been appointed for a few days subsequent to that. We 
arranged our business to come down, but just before— 

Q. How do you know a hearing had been arranged for you to come down 
again? 

A. It was so reported. 

Q. You know that is not proper testimony to give, as a lawyer? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You don’t know that what they said to you about their arrangements is 
not proper testimony for you to give on the stand, as a lawyer? Do you say 
jou do not? 


36 


A. I understand it is proper testimony. 

Mr. Conductor Snow—I object to the counsel talking to the witness in that 
manner. If he has any questions, proceed. 

The Speaker—Proceed with proper cross-examination. 

Mr. Dodge—I want to get at the facts, and do not want to become confused 
more than necessary by the answers 

Q, Will you go on and state what those pretexts are that you attempted to 
tell us about a short time ago? 

A. On the day we had arranged to come down here we had received a notice 
from the chairman of the committee on cities and villages of the Senate that 
at the request of Mr. Dakin the hearing had been postponed, and giving u& 
notice of the time it had been postponed to. On the day to which it had been 
postponed we came down again. Mr. Dakin, at whose request it had been 
postponed that we might appear before that committee, was absent at Grand 
Kapids. On his return- 

Q. Perhaps we can get along without some of that explanation by calling 
your attention to the fact, did you deem it necessary to come down to make 
arrangements with the members of the committee or its chairman in order to 
have a hearing ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. I will ask you, after you had been here several times, why was it that you 
did not pursue some other method ? 

A. We came by appointment. 

Q. Appointment with whom ? 

A. With the committee. 

Q. Do I understand you to say that you had an appointment, or your com¬ 
mittee did, on several different occasions, and that you came here in pursu¬ 
ance of that appointment and then was unable to have a meeting ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With whom did you have that understanding ? 

A. With the committee on cities and villages of the Senate; and on the day 
on which we appeared before them to have the meeting we found the flrst thing 
on the morning of that day Mr. Dakin had had a resolution passed in this 
House recalling that bill from the Senate, so that when we went before the 
Senate committee there was no measure pending before them upon which wo 
could be heard. 

Q. You did not desire to be heard if there was not any bill, if it had been 
recalled to the House? 

A. We came down by appointment to have a hearing before that committee* 

Q. And you wanted a hearing? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Whether there was any bill there for their consideration or not? 

A. The bill was before that committee when we were here. 

Q. It had been recalled, and it was back in the House, was it not? 

A. Understand me— 

Q. I think I do. 

A. The first time we came down the hearing was postponed, and on the day 
to which it was postponed we came down from Saginaw again. When we got 
here we found that that very morning the bill had been recalled from the Sen¬ 
ate, and there was no bill pending there, consequently we could not have a hear¬ 
ing which we had come down for the purpose of having. 

Q. You did not want to have a hearing if there was no bill for considera¬ 
tion; that is correct, is it not? 



37 


A. After the bill was recalled we did not want a hearing there. 

Q. After that bill had gotten back into the House, you wanted a hearing be¬ 
fore the House committee? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you make arrangements with some members of that committee to 
have a hearing? 

A. We did. 

Q. With whom? 

Mr. Conductor Snow—I do not desire to interrupt these proceedings, but I 
think it is high time this sort of cross-examination were stopped, for the simple 
reason that it is irrelevant and incompetent and does not pertain to the issue 
here. 

Mr. Dodge—That objection is very broad and possibly may be well taken, 
but if your honor please, and gentlemen of the House, the purpose of this 
testimony is very obvious to me and I think is plain to the members of this 
House. What we want to show by this witness is that he was specially inter¬ 
ested in this city charter, and just how he came to be interested is something 
that we are anxious to ascertain. He has told us about the time he has spent, 
about his appointments on various occasions and yet he says that the only pay 
he has received for his services is $15 and something. We want to show that 
he was down here not so much in the interest of the city charter of Saginaw 
Oity, but that he was down here in the interest of pursuing this man Dakin, 
and we expect the proof will show before we get through with this hearing that 
this man is after Dakin now, first, last and all the time, and that he has not 
been down here once in good faith for the city charter. That is the purpose 
of this testimony; that is the purpose of this cross-examination. 

The Speaker—The chair is of the opinion that there is no objection to such 
testimony, but it does not see the relevancy of the questions you are asking. 

Mr. Dodge—I do not desire to take up the time unnecessarily, and I would 
not rest the responsibility of this course on my own judgment, did I not con¬ 
sult with my associates with reference to it. I think it is material testimony. 
I think it is testimony showing the real, true intent and purpose of this man 
Frederic L. Eaton, He is the man most prominent here to-day and will be 
throughout this trial, and if we can sliow to the members of the House— 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I desire to interrupt the gentleman. The 
Speaker has ruled against him and it seems to me it is improper and not cour¬ 
teous to discuss the matter after we have had a ruling. 

Mr. Dodge—I did not mean to be discourteous to the Chair, lb is far from 
my thoughts, but I did not understand that the Chair had ruled that this is 
improper testimony. 

The Speaker—The Chair ruled that the object which you sought was proper 
enough, but that the question did not seem to lead to that object. 

Mr. Dodge—That is possibly true. 

The Speaker—It would be more proper to confine questions to that particu¬ 
lar object. 

Mr. Dodge—I shall endeavor to do so. 

Q. You have explained your several trips down here, and now we will come 
to the final trip, and that was the one previous to this, with reference to the 
■city charter. 

A. On the 19th of April? 

Q, You came here on that occasion at the instance of Mr. Little and other 
gentlemen as a member of that committee? 


38 


A. Yes, sir. 

Q, And when you first arrived in the city of Lansing, you went where? 

A. Came directly to the Capitol. 

Q. To whom did you go with reference to the city charter, if any one? 

A. I saw no member of this body in reference to it until after dinner. 

Q. On what day? 

A. On the 19th. I came up for the purpose of seeing the chairmen of the- 
two committees. 

Q. You say that you saw no one with reference to it until after dinner? 

A. No member of this body. 

Q 1 understood you to say on your direct examination that you saw Miv 
Dakin in the morning. Am I correct? 

A. That is true. 

Q. Did your conversation in the morning which you had with Mr. Dakin re-^ 
late to the city charter? 

A. It did. 

Q. Then you were mistaken when you said you had seen nobody a member 
of this House? 

A. My mind was not upon the interview I had with Mr. Dakin. 

Q. You bad a conversation with Mr. Dakin that morning? 

A. I had. 

Q. The first conversatioa took place about 10:30; am I correct? 

A. I believe about that time. 

Q. What conversation did you have with Mr. Dakin at about 10:30? 

A. I met him in the lower corridor of this House; J. Smith, of Saginaw^ 
was with me. 

Q. Who is J. Smith? 

A. He is an old resident of Saginaw City, one of the leading druggists of the 
town. 

Q. He was one of the committee ? 

A. I believe he was here partly- 

Q. Was he one of the committee; you know whether he was or not ? 

A. I do not remember. 

Q. Doii^t you know that he was not one of the committee ? 

A. I don’t know whether Mr. Little under the resolution adopted by the 
council had invited him to come here or not, but I believe he had. 

Q. Had he been here before in the interest of the city charter ? 

A. He had on one occasion. 

Q. You think he was here in pursuance of an invitation by Mr. Little ? 

A. I think so. 

Q. State what took place with Mr. Dakin that morning. 

A. We met Mr. Dakin and Mr. Fellows, spoke to them and shook hands 
with both of them. I asked Mr. Dakin what the situation was with reference 
to our charter. He said there would be nothing done today, or at first he re¬ 
marked “ There will be nothing done, there is no use in your going up for 
there will be nothing done.” I said I did not expect there would be anything 
done this morning because the hnur was appointed for this afternoon. He re¬ 
sponded there “There will be nothing done until Mr. Shackelton returns from 
Saginaw.” 

Q. 'I’hen what took place? Did Mr. Dakin make any reply ? 

A. I asked him what Mr. Shackelton had gone to Saginaw for, or something 
of that kind. He turned back to me, he had stepped one or two steps to- 


39 


•wards the door, he turned back and said that he had seen, or sent, for Mr. 
Shackelton to come down here and he was expected to bring some money to 
put this charter through the House. 

Q. Now, this is what Mr. Dakin said at the first meeting on the 19th of 
April? And who was present and heard him say that? 

A. Giles Fellows was there. 

Q. State whether or not Mr. Fellows and Mr. Smith heard Mr. Dakin say 
that Mr. Shackleton had gone to East Saginaw and would either bring down 
some money or telegraph some. 

A. I don’t think in that interview he said anything about his telegraphing 
money. 

Q. Leaving out the telegraphing, did he say in the presence of these gentle¬ 
men and within their hearing that he would send some money down here in the 
interest of this charter? 

A. He did not. 

Q. State just what he said. 

A. He said that he came down and was expected to bring some money to put 
that charter through the He use with, but did not bring any except seven dol¬ 
lars, and he gave that to them and they have used it, but that didn’t amount to 
anything, and he had gone back to Saginaw to get some more money and there 
would not be anything done until he got back. 

Q. Mr. Dakin made this statement to you in the presence and hearing of Mr. 
Fellows and Mr. Smith? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And they were standing where there isn’t any doubt but what they could 
have heard what he said? 

A. I think there is no doubt of it. 

Q. What reply did you make him about that? 

A. I asked him what he wanted of the money, if there were any expenses to 
pay. He hesitated a little, and I think his reply to that was “ You know what 
I mean.” 

Q. Did you know what he meant? Did you think you knew? 

A. I believe now that I know what he meant. 

Q. Did you at that time know it? 

A. ’No, sir. 

Q. You were innocent of what he meant at that time? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You didn’t have any idea? 

A. I didn’t have any idea. It did not occur to me that anybody was asking 
or could be asking for money to use in any such way as he afterwards sug¬ 
gested ; that did not occur to me. 

Q. What did you think he meant when he said that to you? 

A. I didn’t know but there might be some expenses that had been incurred 
or something of that kind. 

Q. What expenses did you think there were that might have been incurred? 

A. I knew he had some friends down here who were in consultation with 
him, had been down here at least a couple of times, and I didn’t know but 
there were some expenses they wanted to—in fact I didn’t stop to think what 
expenses there might be. 

Q. Did it strike you as anything strange when he told you that he had re¬ 
ceived seven dollars, and that it didn't amount to anything? 

A. It did not when he said that. 


40 


Q. And you paid no more attention to it? 

A. If that had been all there was to it I should have thought nothing about 
it, because with the four or tiv^e persons that had been here once or twice, I 
should not have been surprised at an expenditure of perhaps twenty or thirty 
dollars. 

Q. What do you say were the one or two occasions when you were led to be¬ 
lieve that twenty-five or thirty dollars might have been expended? 

A. It occurs to me that I have seen of the gentlemen who represent the 
Labor Union party, it may be that I have seen three, or four, or five of them 
down here at least two or three times when I have been here, an i their ex¬ 
penses in coming and going would amount to at least five or six dollars 
apiece. 

Q. Did you think in that connection that Mayor Shackelton was putting up 
seven dollars and going back for more money? 

A. I didn’t think anything about it at all. 

Q. Won’t you please explain how it is that you thought that this money was 
being devoted to that purpose ? 

A. I didn’t think anything of it, but I supposed there might be some ex¬ 
penses, and there had been some talk of coming to an understanding. 

Q. What was tr.is expense for ? 

A. Hotel bill and railroad fare and the like of that. 

Q. “ And the like of that,” what does that mean ? Do you mean for 
drinks ? 

A. Drinks and cigars and all such things as are usually used upon such oc¬ 
casions. 

Q. As are usually appropriated upon such occasions ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you ever seen down here at Lansing drinks or cigars appropri¬ 
ated for occasions of that kind ? 

A. Amongst the deputation ? 

Q. With anyone ? 

A. I think amongst the Saginaw deputation I have seen some cigars used 
and some drinks used. 

Q. Have you appropriated them yourself ? 

A. I have. 

Q. Whereabouts have you seen those things done ? 

A. At the Hudson House and at Eichle’s the first time I stopped there. 

Q. Where else? 

A. 1 don’t recollect any other place except on the occasion I have alluded to 
at the Windsor saloon. 

Q. How many drinks were taken there that day by that party ? 

A. Only one. 

Q. How many drinks already had you taken that day ? 

A. I think that was the first one, 

Q. And the last one ? 

A. I won’t say the last; but 1 don’t recall any other. 

Q. As we have touched upon that subject, pardon me if I ask if you are in 
the habit of drinking liquor ? 

A. No. 

Q. Except when you come to the Capitol ? 

A. I will not say that. I am not a radical temperance man. 

Mr. Lakey—I object to that kind of question. 1 would like to ask the chair 
to rule upon it. 


41 


Mr. Dodge—This is asked in the very best of good faith, and I took pains to 
ask the gentleman’s pardon. We had been touching upon that subject and I 
am very glad I asked the question because the witness turns out to be a better 
man in that regard than I had supposed him to be. I asken the question in 
good faith and not for the purpose of making sport. 

Mr. Dodge—I want to simply show whether upon these occasions down here 
he has been in the habit of drinking, and when he has had these interviews 
with Mr. Dakin on these occasions if he has not been somewhat under the in¬ 
fluence of liquor. If he has not certainly the House will be glad to know it, 
and if he has they certainly ought to know it in the interest of Mr. Dakin. 

The Speaker—The chair is of opinion that the question whether he was un¬ 
der the influence of liquor at the time would be proper. 

’’'^Mr. Dodge—Suppose it thould turn out from the evidence in this case that 
Mr. Eaton was a man in the habit of using intoxicating liquors, or that he was 
an habitual drunkard, or an habitual drinker. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—If the gentleman will pardon me, since it has 
been partially gone into, it is the desire of the committee that they shall draw 
out this whole liquor question at this time, both as to his habits in Saginaw as 
well as in Lansing. 

The Speaker—The chair has no objection to the testimony going in. My 
ruling was simply with a view of shortening the proceedings, not deeming the 
testimony relevant in his case. 

Q. If you desire some water you will find some in that pitcher before you. 

A. I very seldom use it. 

Q. You have stated on that occasion there was only one round of liquor 
ordered by this gathering ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether or not they had been drinking when you came in ? 

A. I do not. 

Q. You have related the conversation that took place down at the Windsor 
restaurant, and you say that the Windsor restaurant, if you will allow me to 
correct you, is on Michigan and Capitol avenue. Its off the main street. 

A. On the street leading down to the bridge ? 

Q. Yes. 

A. Then I was mistaken. 

Q. Then you meant on the corner of Washington and Michigan avenues? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you went down to the restaurant and went in, and on the counter 
there were some candies and confectionery? 

A. Yes, sir. 

0- And then do you mean that at the back part of that room there were 
some stalls in there? 

A. No, not in that room. 

Q. You do not mean to say there were candies and confectionery in the 
room where the stalls were? 

A. No, sir. 

Q You were mistaken about that? 

A. No, sir; I did not so state. 

Q. Did you state this morning that you went into a place where there were 
candies and confectionery on the counter? 

A. I said that I did not observe particularly what was there, but I think 
there was a show-case with confectionery, 

6 


42 


Q. You know that there is a restaurant this side of there? 

A. No, sir, I never was in there. 

Q. Have you ever been to the bakery and restaurant this side of the Windsor 
saloon ? 

A. No, sir; the only time 1 was ever in the Windsor saloon was upon that 
occasion. 

Q. When you go back into the Windsor saloon are there stalls in there? 

A. I think there were. 

Q. You went into the one on the right or left? 

A. On the right. 

Q. That is provided with curtains? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And the curtain slides so that you are in there out of sight? 

A. That is what it is there for. 

Q. And there is where you went with Mr. Dakin and these other gentlemen? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. After you got there, how long was it before the drinks were brought in ? 

A. I think, fifteen minutes. 

Q. What conversation did you have on the corner of Michigan and Washing¬ 
ton Avenues, before you went into this stall, with Mr. Dakin ? 

A. I inquired of Mr. Dakin what had transpired with reference to our charter 
since I was here before. 

Q. I understood you to say that this morning, but did not you make that 
inquiry when you first met him at 10:30 ?—You met him first at 10: 30 ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You had a talk about it and he told you what was necessary to be done, 
then, where did you go next ? 

A. At the corner of Washington and Capitol avenue. 

Q. Michigan avenue. 

A. Yes, with that correction it would be at the corner of Michigan and 
Washington avenues. It is where the city national bank is. 

Q. Then you were near this corner of Michigan and Washington avenue ? 

A. That was the place. 

Q. What time was this in the day? 

A. About 11 o’clock. 

Q. About thirty-five or forty after you say you met him in the capitol? 

A. I should think so. 

Q. You had a talk with him in the capitol about the city charter and as to 
what was necessary? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then when you met him the next time it was there on the corner, and 
you asked him what the situation of the city charter was? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What did you ask him? 

A. I asked him what had been done in the matter since I was here before► 
Mr. SiiMckleton and Mr. Fellows I had learned since I came here had been 
down here during the day before and they had been trading with reference to 
it. 

Q. Trading? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Tiading property? 

A. No, sir; they had been making a trade; they had beem compromising so 
as to satisfy- 



43 


Q. Compromising what ? Themselves or whom ? 

A. I understood that they had entered into a written agreement with the 
parties representing the opposition to our charter that certain concessions 
should be made with reference to expenditures or future taxation, and the pay¬ 
ments of improvements recently made, and that then the opposition of Carrol- 
ton and East Saginaw parties would be withdrawn. I had heard this in a 
general way, and when I met them there my purpose was to ask what had been 
done by these gentlemen, which had all taken place since I was here before. 

Q. You had come down here right from Saginaw where these gentlemen 
were ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you say you met Mr. Dakin at the capitol ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You had a little talk with him there, but you didn’t ask him what had 
been done other than by way of amendment, or agreed upon, or what com¬ 
promise had been made ? 

A. Here in the capitol ? 

Q. Yes. 

A. But when you met him down there on the corner as you say, you for the 
first time asked him the details? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he tell you them? 

A. No, sir. 

Q, What else took place there? 

A. In response to that question Dakin alluded to the fact that Mayor. 
Shackleton had gone to Saginaw to get some money and to have a consulta¬ 
tion. 

Q. How did he come to make reference to that subject again? 

A. 1 asked him the question, what had been done with reference to our 
charter since I was here before. Whether I mentioned Mayor Shackleton or 
not I don’t know. He immediately responded that Mr. Shackleton and Mr. 
Fellows came down yesterday, and that Mr. Shackleton had gone back to 
Saginaw with Kepresentative Linton to have a consultation with people there, 
and again alluded to the fact that he was going to bring down some money 

Q. And this he stated of his own volition without any question coming from 

you? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He seemed to be talking that to you incidentally ? 

A. Yes, sir; it seemed so to me. 

Q. And this was in the presence of these other men ? 

A. Yes, sir; and in the presence, I should say, of from 15 to 20 men who 

were coming and going within 30 feet of us. 

Q. He didn’t seem to take any pains to guard himself—he talked it right 
out? 

A. Yes, with surprising freedom. 

Q. To whom was it surprising? 

A. To me. 

Q. You were very much surprised at his talking on the corner? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You began to comprehend better what he meant by that sort of talk than 
his other talk up in the capitol? 

A. Yes, sir. 


44 


Q. Did you tell Dakin that you were surprised—did you manifest any sur¬ 
prise ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What did you do ? 

A. I proceeded to see how far this talk about money had gone. 

Q. That is what you proceeded at thereon the corner? 

A. No, sir, that is what I proceeded to do, but not on the corner. 

Q. That is what you proceeded to do when you went down to the saloon ? 

A. YfcS, sir. 

Q. Did you say anything to Mr. Dakin or any one else what you proposed 
to do ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q Didn’t you on that occasion leave Mr. Dakin in the street and go back to 
the Lansing House ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you leave them anywhere on the street ani go away and return after- 
waids ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. But you went directly down to the saloon ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And there proceeded to ascertain the fact of the business, what that 
meant ? 

A Yes, sir. 

Q. There is where this conversation about money really first struck you as 
something wrong ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where were you first impressed with the idea that there was something 
wrong and illegitimate about the question of money ? 

A. When I had the conversation with Mr. Dakin, when I first met him. 

Q. Here in tiie capitol ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then you were impressed with the idea that that there was S3mething 
wrong ? 

A. I was impressed that there was something wrong. 

Q. 1 understood you to say sometime ago when you testified that at that time 
you did not understand or did not believe that anything was wrong about it ? 
A. You misunderstood me. 

Q. Possibly. Never mind, then, I will not trouble you. You really thought 
when you fiist met Mr. Dakin here in the capitol that there was something 
wrong, did you ? 

A. Not when I first met him. 

Q. Dill you after yeu had had that conversation with him ? 

A. As he left me I thought something was wrong. 

Q. What did you think there was wrong about it ? 

A. I believe they were after some money. 

Q. That who was after some money? 

A. I thought Dakin and Fellows were after money. 

Q And who did you think was going to provide it for them? 

A. At that time it did not occur to me. 

Q. Did you think there was any impropriety in Mr. Fellows being after some 
money? 

A. 1 did. 




45 


Q. What impropriety was there in Mr. Fellows trying to get some money? 
You would if you could, would you not? 

A. Ordinarily there would be impropriety. Mr. Fellows, however, took me 
to one side as Mr. Dakin left and explained to me what he purposed to do with 
the money. 

Q. What did Mr. Fellows tell you he purposed to do with the money? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Was Mr. Dakin present? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Dodge—What did Mr. Fellows tell you he proposed to do with the 
money? 

A. As Mr. Dakin left— 

Q. That is not really responsive to my question. What did Mr. Fellows tell 
you he proposed to do with that money? 

A. He told me that he proposed to see members. Grand Army members^ 
that he had been at work with them yesterday; that he would go to one of 
them and talk with him and urge him to vote for our charter and tell him it 
would be a big feather in Mr. Dakin's cap if we could get that charter 
through, tell how interested he was in it and how great a favor it would be to 
him if they would support it, and that he had got to have some money to do 
that work with. 

Q. Was he telling you what he would tell a member of the House, or was he 
telling this to you? 

A. He was telling this to me, that he would spend money with them, and 
that he had spent about thirty dollars yesterday, last night, in that way. 

Q. He told you that he had spent about thirty dollars in entertaining them? 
What, if anything wrong, did you think there was in that? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington: I submit, Mr. Speaker, that this is incompe¬ 
tent. The question is whether Dakin is guilty of these charges. Toe opinion 
of this witness of a certain proceeding does not tend in any way to affect that. 

Mr. Dodge : I trust my brother will not be technical about it. Let us ascer¬ 
tain all there is of it. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington : We have let him go on with testimony which 
was entirely incompetent, just for the reason that we did not wish to be 
technical; but the members want to get through before the next legislature 
is elected, so that we can give place to them. I think it is time to call a 
halt. 

The Speaker: The proper question would be as to what took place, 

Mr. Dodge : I will amend my question in this way: What wrong did you 
think there was in what look place ? 

A. To what do you allude ? 

Q. What wrong did you think there was in what Mr. Fellows had said to 
you about the money that he was using, had used, or could use ? 

A. He made some allusions that led me to infer that he wanted this money 
to use directly with the members by giving the money to those members. 

Q. He gave you to understand that, did he ? 

A. Yes, sir, by his talk. 

Q. Just please state what language he used that gave you to understand 
that he wanted to corrupt directly the members of this Legislature. 

A. He said that he was well acquainted with a good many Grand Army 
men, that he could get together with them in talking over old times, and they 
were most of them poor men like himself that had to work for a living, and 
that he would talk with them in this way, and this bdiug a local bill they did 


46 


not care anything about it one way or the other, and he would shove them out 
hve dollars or so and he would secure their influence. That is the talk he had 
with me standing right out there by the electric clock. 

Q. Then he told you substantially this—am I correct—that he would pay 
some of them live dollars apiece ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And buy their support and votes in that way ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And wanted you to furnish the money for that purpose ? 

A. He spoke of that in connection with Mayor Shackelton’s going after 
money. 

A. Then you understood, did you, from him and from Dakin, that Mayor 
Shackelton had gone after money for that purpose ? Is that correct ? 

A. Yes, sir. But allow me here to say in explanation, that I did not be¬ 
lieve a word that Fellows told me about the work that he was doing. 

Q. You did not? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You did not think he would accomplish anything of the kind? 

A. I did not believe that he was doing that kind of work with the mem¬ 
bers. 

Q. If he stated it to you, why did you disbelieve him? 

A. I could not believe him. 

Q. Why did you think he was lying to you about it? 

A. I thought he was doing it to get some money to put in his own pocket, 
and used that way to do it. 

Q. You thought that would be the most reasonable story to believe. 

A. Yes, sir. I could more easily believe that than believe that a stranger 
would come amongst a body like this and go to doing the work that he repre¬ 
sented that he was doing. It struck me when he talked it to me as a thing too 
ridiculous to listen to. 

Q. You believed, then, that instead of getting that money for the members 
as he represented to you, that he was getting it to put in his own pocket? 

Mr. Conductor Dii kema—I object to that question on the ground that it has 
been already answered. 

Q. 1 will withdraw that. Mr. Fellows and you have had some little difficulty 
have you not ? 

A. Not a particle in the world. 

Q. Are you on friendly terms ? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—That is objected to. We are not trying Mr. 
Fellows. 

The Speaker—The Chair is of the opinion that all this testimony relative to 
Mr. Fellows is entirely irrelevant. 

Mr. Dodge—Perhaps some portion of it may be. I do not care to follow 
that up in that direction much further ; but if the Chair please and if the 
gentlemen of the House please, it seems to me it is very important to know if 
Mr. Fellows, one of the witnesses subpoened here on the part of the State, is 
the kind of a character that the main witnesses for the prosecution represents 
him to be. It seems to me, as a matter of good horse sense, that the members 
of the Legislature ought to know all about it, as to just the kind of a man he 
is, and 1 certainly think we should have the opinion of this witness with refer¬ 
ence to his character. That is the only purpose of it. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—The opinion of this witness makes no difference. 


47 


When Mr. Fellows is called he can fuliy examine him as to his history. 

The Speaker—The Chair is of the opinion that all this testimony relatiye to 
what took place between the witness and Mr. Fellows in the absence of Mr. 
Dakin is entirely irreleyant at this stage of the proceedings. 

Mr. Dodge—Very well, I will not press it. 

The Speaker—The Chair holds in his hand a question which he will read: 
Was there anyone else present at this conyersation between yourself and Mr. 
Fellows? 

A. There was not. 

By Mr. Dodge: 

Q. At the time you got down to the saloon, you had made up your mind that 
there was something very wrong in this asking for money, and you had come 
to that conclusion from the talk that you had had with Mr. Dakin and with 
Mr. Fellows? Am I correct about that? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And so you went into the saloon for what purpose? 

Mr. Conductor Snow—That is objected to. It has all been gone over and 
the witness has answered that question. 

Mr. Dodge—I will not ask him that. He said he went in to get something, 
and he told what it was, but I did not ask him for what particular purpose he 
went. 

The Speaker—The witness will state if he knows the purpose. 

A. When this matter of Shackleton’s going home for some money was al¬ 
luded to again on the street, I was very much impressed— 

Q. Impressed with what ? 

A. That there was something radically wrong going on here, and it 
frightened me—if that is the proper term. 

Q. You know whether it is or not. 

A. I will say that it startled me, because I did not know how far nor how 
common this talk might have been, and I was apprehensive, if there was talk 
being had about money to influence the Saginaw legislation, and with that kind 
of freedom, that I might find myself, perhaps, involved in the inquiry, and it 
occurred to me that the first; thing to do was, if I could, to see how far this 
had gone, and who was involved in it. 

Q. Then I understand you that your apprehension was based upon some 
possibility that you might be drawn personally into it yourself? 

A. Yes, sir, for I had already found myself involved in the conversation 
about it. 

Q. And you thought, then, you would go with these men into the place and 
see whether or not you were involved in it ? 

A. I thought I would go somewhere where I could pursue this inquiry a 
little, and see, if I could, how far it had gone. 

Q. How far did you you think it had gone at that time ? 

A. I did not stop to think. I did not have time to think. 

Q. I understood you to say you thought things looked cloudy for yourself, 
possibly ? 

A. It did. When I found myself involved in a conversation about getting 
money to use to get a bill through this House. 

Q. Did you find yourself involved in that predicament? 

A I found myself involved in a conversation about it here in the lower cor¬ 
ridor. 

Q. When ? 


48 


A. In my first conversation with Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Now, as is suggested by counsel, you felt yourself alarmed and startled 
here in the capitol over the conversation that had taken place with reference 
to money ? 

A. No, not until it was alluded to a second time. 

Q. Where? 

A. At the corner of Michigan and Washington avenues. 

Q. The other matter made no impression on you—what you heard in the 
House? 

A. It did make an impression on me. 

Q. But you did not feel that you might yourself be involved until you came 
down to the time of the second conversation. Is that correct? 

A. It did not appear to me in that way—in fact the conversation that took 
place in the corridor of this House- 

A. I want you to answer my question and not tell something else. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—The gentleman has asked the witness a fair 
question, then as soon as the answer begins he interrupts him when he seems 
to be answering the question correctly and properly. He should be allowed to 
answer the question. 

Mr. Dodge—My brother has had experience enough to know that it is not a 
proper method of objecting to a question. We are undertaking, as near as 
may be, to proceed under court rules, and I do not propose that this witness 
shall answer any question that I do not ask him. I hope that my brother will 
not insist on his point. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—I propose, Mr. Speaker, to see justice done, and 
I thiek if my brother understood the answer that was being given he would 
find that it was in harmony with the question which was asked. My brother 
is so anxious to get out an answer that will be in his own favor that he hardly 
understands his own questions. 

Mr. Dedge—There is a proper way to object to my questions and I trust my 
learned friend will make his objections in a proper way, and that he will not 
make a speech for the benefit of the House and the witness. I know that he 
understands proceedings of this kind sufficiently to make a proper objection, 
without interrupting me. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—I beg the gentleman’s pardon from him, but I did 
not interrupt him. 

The Chair—The gentleman will answer the question. 

Mr. Dodge—Will the stenographer read the last question and answer ? 

The official stenographer read as follows: 

“ Q. But you did not feel that you might yourself be involved until you 
came down to the time of the second conversation ? Is that correct ? 

“A. It did not appear to me in that way, in fact, the conversation that 
took place in the corridor of this House-” 

Mr. Dodge—I submit that the witness was keeping away from the question 
entirely. 

The Speaker—The examination will proceed. 

Mr. Dodge—If the chair will pardon me, I desire my brother and the House 
to understand that I do not wish to appear captious, but I want to get at the 
facts and to do it as best I know how. 

Q. Will you please answer this question : When did that idea occur to you 
that there was something wrong in your conversation down there on the cor¬ 
ner of Michigan and Washington avenues ? 


49 


A. As soon as Mr. Dakin, in reply to my inquiry, alluded to the subject of 
money. 

Q. Then you had made up your mind for the first time that there was some¬ 
thing to be astounded at and frightened about. Is that correct ? You said a 
moment ago that you were startled. 

A. That reply did startle me. 

Q. Then you followed this matter up, if I understood your evidence upon di¬ 
rect examination, and you followed him right into the saloon, or did you invite 
him in ? 

A. I did not invite him. I cannot say which proposed stepping inside. 

Q. But at this time you were very much startled, and yet you say you went 
into the saloon? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. After you got into the saloon how did you expect to allay ydur fright or 
do away with your feeling of anxiety in this matter, by pursuing the course 
which you state on your direct examination you did pursue in the saloon stall 
on that occasion ? 

A. I thought by having further conversation with these gentlemen I could 
ascertain how far this scheme to get some money had gone and what the pur¬ 
pose was. 

Q. Did you not think when you were in company with these men on this 
occasion that you were in pretty bad company, if there was any doubt as to 
their methods? And did you not feel yourself somewhat more alarmed when 
you discovered what you communicated to the Legislature and testified to here 
this morning? 

A. You mean after our interview had terminated? 

Q. After you commenced your interview there ? 

A. I became more and more impressed at every step in that interview. 

Q. How were you impressed? 

A. I was impressed that there was something radically wrong. 

Q. And for that reason did you induce Mr. Dakin to check off the several 
parties that appear upon this list which has been exhibited here this morning? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Had you up to this time informed Mr. Dakin and Mr. Fellows that you 
were surprised? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you make any objection to their statements ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or to their methods? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. How did you come to advise Mr. Dakin to check off certain individual 
members of the House ? How did you come to advise him to do that? 

A. You mean in what manner? 

Q. I do not ask you in what manner. I ask you how you came to do that, 
how you satisfied your head and your conscience if you were laboring under so 
much anxiety? 

A. I was pursuing this inquiry to find the extent of what his purpose was 
in regard to money. 

Q. What the extent of his purpose was? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was it for that reason that you desired him to give his opinion as to the 
members that he thought might be corrupted by the use of money? 

7 


50 


A. Not wholly. 

Q. Was it partially? 

A. It was partially that and partially this: Up to that time he had repre¬ 
sented that there were a good many members that he wanted to see. At first, 
from his conversation, it did not occur to me to doubt but that he might have 
talked with some, perhaps, on this same subject. As he went on to repeat that 
there was a considerable number that might be seen in this way, I doubted his 
statement of having talked with anybody, and it occurred to me that that was 
a scheme of his to see if he could not get some money for his own use. 

Q. For Dakin’s own use? 

A. Yes, sir, or Dakin’s and Fellows’. 

Q. Now, if you thought these men were pursuing that sort of a course to 
get money for themselves, why did you need to feel startled? Why were you 
so frightened? 

A. Because I regarded the use of money in connection with ofiicial action as 
being one of the gravest offenses that could be committed in any shape. 

Q. But you have just stated that you did not regard that this money was to 
be used with any one else, but that it was to be used by the respondent and 
Fellows for themselves? 

A. I regarded that as equally wrong. 

Q. And therefore you felt started and alarmed for fear of yourself? And 
now will you state what fear you had of yourself? 

A. It was more that it— 

Q. Now just state that, please. 

A. It was more that it occurred to me that something might be going on 
that might compromise the good name of Saginaw in connection with this 
Legislature. 

Q. Do you think, let me ask, that the good name of Saginaw or of the mem¬ 
bers of the Legislature of the State of Michigan would have been comprom¬ 
ised had you not asked Mr. Dakin to take his pencil and check off their names? 

A. I do, 

Q. And then reported it to the House of Eepresentatives ? 

A. I do. 

Q. How is it that you think the Legislature and the Saginaw Valley would 
have been compromised had you not done this ? 

A. I would like to have the question read. 

Q. The official stenographer read as follows : “Do you think, let me ask, 
that the good name of Saginaw or of the members of the Legislature of the 
State of Michigan would have been compromised had you not asked Mr. 
Dakin to take his pencil and check off their names, and then reported it to 
the House of Representatives ? 

A. I never did that. 

Q. Never did what ? 

A. Never reported if to the House. 

Q. You reported it to the Speaker ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In a letter addressed to the Speaker ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you not expect it would be reported to the House ? 

A. I will explain to you- 

Q. You may explain on your re-direct. 

A. Mr. Diekema—The witness will be privileged to answer the question fully. 
No one can understand it unless he does. 


51 


The Speaker—Let the witness answer. 

Mr. Dodge—Let the question be repeated. 

The question was repeated by the official stenographer as follows: 

“Did you not exnect it to be reported to the House ?” 

Q. Answer that yes or no. That is susceptible of that kind of an answer. 

A. I can not answer it yes or no. 

Q. Then let it go. 

A. I.desire to answer it though. 

Q. You may when I get ready to ask you again, or if I do not you can 
^inswer it on the redirect examination. You directed his making these marks 
opposite these several names, did you not, and he made those marks there at 
your solicitation ? 

A. The question is ambiguous. 

Q. I will ask you part of it: did you direct his making those marks there ? 
Answer it yes or no. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Who did ? 

A. No one. 

Q. How did he come to make them ? 

A. I requested him- 

Q. Just answer the question. How did he come to make them ? 

Mr. Diekema—I insist that the gentleman shall not interrupt or badger the 
witness. 

The Speaker—Let the witness answer the question. 

Q. How did he come to make them ? 

A. I requested him to check ofi on that list the names of those that he 
wanted to see in the manner that he had suggested. 

Q. Then he made those checks there at your solicitation ? 

A. At my request. 

Q. Did he offer to do anything of that kind until you had requested him to 
do it ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he not hesitate when you asked him to do it, and did you not rather 
insist upon his doing it ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What did you say to him ? 

A. I asked him to check off the names of those he desired to see. 

Q. What did you do that for ? 

A. Because as he read them over and stated the names I undertook to count 
them, and when he had got down about six or seven names there was a running 
conversation going on, and I lost the count. Then I suggested, “Just take a 
pencil and check them off.’’ 

Q. What did you ask him to check off those names for? 

A. So I could see how many names there were on that list that he was pre¬ 
tending that he wanted to see and use money with. 

Q. Was that your only purpose? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you not state in your letter to the Speaker of this House that you 
communicated with him because of the reason that you wanted to ascertain 
whether methods of this kind could be resorted to in the Legislature or not ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you not say in that letter, ‘H make this communication to you be- 


52 


cause I believe that the suggestion that we ought to furnish money for the 
purpose of influencing this body to grant us a charter, which we believe is just 
and proper in all respects, is wholly uncalled for and ought not to be en¬ 
couraged, and for the purpose of asking you, as the presiding officer of this 
body, what course ought to be pursued in the matter?” 

A. I did. That is a part of my communication. 

Q. Then I will ask you again what your real purpose was in having Mr. 
Dakin check off those names? 

A. To see how many there were that he was pretending he wanted to see. 

Q. Was not your real purpose at that time in getting him to check off those 
names, that you might report it to the Legislature? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or to the Speaker of the House ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. When did you come to that conclusion? 

A. While we were waiting for supper at the Hudson House. 

Q. How long after this? 

A. Probably six hours. 

Q. What time did you meet there—about eleven? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. This was about five o’clock? 

A. Between five and six. 

Q. And you came to the conclusion then that you would report that matter 
to the Speaker ? 

A. Not at that time. 

Q. When did you come to that conclusion ? 

A. After supper. 

Q. Then it was about seven hours afterward ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Had you been talking with Mr. Little, or anyone in regard to the mat¬ 
ter ? 

A. I had. 

Q. And the conversation you had with them took place where? 

A. In the Hudson House. 

Q. At what time ? 

A. With Mr. Little just before we went into tea. 

Q. What did you have to say to Mr. Little about it ? 

Mr. Diekema—That question is objected to. 

Mr. Dodge—I will withdraw the question. 

Q. You talked it over with Mr. Little that you would address a letter to the 
Speaker of the House. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. I understood you to say you did. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. When did you first come to the conclusion that you would address a 
letter to the Speaker of the House ? 

A. The next morning. 

Q. What date was that ? 

A. The 20th. 

Q. You came to the conclusion next morning that you would address the 
Speaker on this subject, did you ? That is what you said. Is that correct ? ;;j 
A. I was requested- 


53 


Q. Lawyer Eaton, that is not proper. You know the question. I ask you 
when you came to the conclusion that you would address the Speaker of the 
House upon that subject ? 

A. I came to the conclusion that I would see the Speaker about it. 

Q. When did you come to the conclusion that you would write him that let¬ 
ter? 

A. About 10 o’lock the next morning. 

Q. On the morning of the 20th? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You came to Lansing on the 19th? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Don’t you know if you came to Lan^^ing on the 19th and you would ad¬ 
dress the Speaker a letter on the 20th it would not be in the journal until the 
21st? 

A. I did not know anything about the date, but my recollection is that it 
was on the 20th. My recollection is that I wrote the letter on the 20th. 

Q. On the next day? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And then how long did you remain in Lansing on this occasion? 

A. I think I went home the evening of the 20th. That is my recollection. 
It may have been the 21 st. 

Q. Let me ask you the question again, because I am in doubt about it my¬ 
self. With whom did you talk about writing this letter to the Speaker of the 
House? 

A. With the Speaker. 

Q. Before it was written? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With whom else? 

A. Will you allow me to state the circumstances of my communicating it to 
the Speaker in full? 

Q. No. Who else was it? 

A. I don’t know that I spoke to any one else about putting that matter in 
writing, except the Speaker and the Clerk of the House when I submitted it, 
and he suggested that it be a sworn statement and added an affidavit to it. 

Q. At the time you had this conversation there, you made up your mind 
that you would follow this up, and that you would have these marks made and 
that you would have the sums of money set opposite their several names, for the 
purpose of doing what? 

A. At what time do you allude to? 

Q. The time you were in this stall at the saloon. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—That is objected to as having been answered three 
times. 

The Speaker—I think that question has been answered before. 

Mr. Dodge—Not in regard to the sums of money. He was not asked about 
placing figures opposite their names. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—That is directly answered. 

Mr. Dodge—I do not remember it. I submit it has not been answered and 
will leave it to the Speaker that the question as to why he put these figures 
opposite their names was not undertaken to be answered by the witness nor 
asked before. 

The Speaker—Ask the question. 

A. There are several transactions involved in that question, and I cannot 


54 


answer them all in one answer. I will answer this: At the time that I re¬ 
quested Mr. Dakin to check those names off 1 had no other purpose whatever 
in my mind except to ascertain the number of persons that he proposed to see- 

Q. “I then requested him to place opposite each name that he had checked 
the amount he thought would be necessary to use with each member.” 

A. I did. 

Q. What do you mean by that; use for what purpose? 

A. Use for the purpose that he had described. 

Q. I am asking you what your opinion was about that. Please answer for 
what purpose you intended the sum of money should be placed opposite the 
name, for what purpose; the figures? 

A. I did not intend that the money should be used at all. 

Q. What did you ask him to put the figures there for? 

A. To ascertain what his idea was about the amount of money he wanted to 
get. 

Q. What interest had you in that, what was that to you? 

A. I was trying to ascertain how far this matter had gone, and what his in¬ 
tentions were about getting some money. 

Q. What earthly concern was that to you? 

A. I was interested in seeing that nothing improper was done in regard to 
the legislation about the Saginaw charter. 

Q. That is the reason that you asked him to put those figures opposite the 
names of those honorable members ? 

A. I wanted to see how much money- 

Q. Answer the question. 

A. My only purpose at that time was to see how much money he was after. 

Q. Why did you want to know about the money he was after ? Why did 
you not ask him in so many words ? 

A. I stated that he said he could not tell. 

Q. You expected to induce him to make these figures and you would tell in 
that way. How did you expect to tell in that way ? 

A. By adding the several sums together. 

Q. Why did you take a list from the House roll-call and use it for that par¬ 
ticular purpose ? 

A. Because he hesitated so in giving me the names of the parties that he 
wished to see. He did not mention more than two or three, and was hesita¬ 
ting. 

Q. You pressed him, did you not? 

A. I did. 

A. Why did you press him? 

A. He had represented that there were some thirty-four Grand Army men 
here, most of them he wanted to see. There were some democrats that did 
not belong to the Grand Army, and his representation was that there was a 
large number that he was going to work with when he got this money. I 
wanted to know who those men were. 

Q. What did you want to know that for? 

A. I wanted to make up my mind whether he had been talking with any of 
the members. 

Q. What did you want to make up your mind to that for? 

A. I wanted to see whether he was not putting up a job to get some money 
himself. 


55 


Q. What did you want to see that for? 

A. Because I wanted to stop it. 

Q. Why in the world didn’t you tell him to stop instead of asking him to put 
these figures opposite the members’ names? 

A. I had not got hold of enough to find out whether there was anything to 
stop. 

Q. And yet you thought you had been very much startled from the sur¬ 
rounding circumstances from what you had heard? 

A. I WHS startled. 

Q. You thought there was not anything you had thus far heard that ought 
to be stopped until you had got a large number of members of the Legislature 
is that true? 

A. I thought from the beginning there was something to be stopped. 

Q. Why did you not say to him that it ought to be stopped? 

A. I thought it was important for me in the first place to see how far this 
had gone and who was involved in it. 

Q. Did you not know that it would be a reflection upon the members of the 
Legislature whose names he checked, if that was made public? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You had him do something that you knew would be a reflection upon the 
individual members of this House? 

A. But he was repeating those names verbally. 

‘ Q. Why did you not take them down ? 

A. I had nothing in my hand at the time. 

Q. How did you happen to have that roll call with you ? 

A. I had it for more than a month. 

Q. You said a moment ago and you said on your direct examination that 
there were only two names mentioned by Mr. Dakin and that you were press¬ 
ing him to get other names ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q Now you say he was naming those names over ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How do you explain those two statements, if he was only naming two 
and you were pressing him for others, how was it that he was naming over 
this entire list ? 

A. I do not say he was naming these individuals he marked, but he was 
professing to give to me the names of the members of this House with whom he 
could use money. 

Q. Did he tell you so ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q, In the presence of these gentlemen ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And then you said “check them off ? ” 

A. Yes, sir. That was before I took out the roll call. 

Q. And he was giving these from nis off-hand statement ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many names did he give you ? 

A. I don’t think he mentioned more than two or three. 

Q. You said he mentioned two ? 

A. He mentioned two, there might have been three. 

Q. If you had not taken out that roll call he would n >t have inclu le I tlu 
other members ? 


56 


A. Possibly not. 

Q. Who was responsible for the reflection, if there was any, cast upon those 
members, you or Mr. Dakin ? You were urging and pressing him to do this. 
Who was responsible ? 

A. It is a matter of opinion. 

Q. What is your opinion about it? 

A. My opinion is that if Mr. Dakin had not started the talk about money no 
one would have been involved it. 

Q. Do you think if it had not been for you any one would have been involved 
in it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How? 

A. I think this talk was going on, not publicly, but privately. 

Q. How do you know it was? 

A. From the very free manner in which this was spoken of, without any 
attempt to secrecy, or concealment, or privacy. 

Q. You thoughc you would come down here and put a stop to it? 

A. Ho. 

Q. What did you think about it? 

A. I knew nothing about it until I arrived here. That was the first time I 
suspected there was anything of the kind. 

Q. You believed that the proper thing that was necessary for you to do in 
order to put a stop to this was to have Mr. Dakin take his pencil, check off 
several names, put the sums opposite their names and report the same to this 
House ? 

A. No; I have not so stated or intimated. 

Q. I ask you if that was your purpose ? 

A. No. 

Q. Why did you address the Speaker with these names attached, this House 
roll call ? 

A. I will explain that if you desire. 

Q. I desire it. 

A. If you desire me to state fully the circumstances of my making that 
communication. 

Q. Ido. 

A. After this interview had terminated I went to the Hudson House and 
had dinner. After dinner 1 came up and met the committees on municipal 
corporations and labor interests. I found that instead of the meeting before 
that committee having been postponed, that nothing had been said about a 
postponment. The committee met at one o’clock, as had been agreed upon, 
and the matter of the Saginaw charter was called up. The clerk of the com¬ 
mittee then stated that Mr. Linton had gone to Saginaw with Mayor Sbackel- 
ton with an understanding which they thought would be satisfactory to the 
parties interested, and that probably it might result in withdraw¬ 
ing the opposition from the charter. The chairman of one of those 

committees said that there had been a great many postponments, 

and expressed himself quite strongly that this ought not to have 

been done to compel the Saginaw City gentlemen to again come down 
here to attend the hearing and not have that hearing take place. The chaii- 
man of both committees spoke quite earnestly about it. VVe finally said Mr. 
Shackelton will come back this evening undoubtedly and Mr. Linton, and it 
will be better for us to remain here until to-morrow morning and see what 


57 


the result of their deliberations has been than to have it postponed until a 
futuie time, and we consented that it be put over until the next morning. 

The two committees said they would give us a hearing next morning at eight 
o’clock, and the matter was disposed of thus in a few minutes. We were not 
before the committee more than fifteen minutes I think. I then went out and 
went down upon the street and met Alderman Tillotson, one of the aldermen 
of Saginaw. He knew we were to have a hearing h^re that day. He had 
been down south, and on his way back he stopped off here at Lansing, know¬ 
ing there would be some Saginaw gentlemen here. My recollection is that this 
was the first time I had seen him in two months. He enquired with reference 
to the situation in regard to the charter. He told me he had just seen Mr. Dakin 
and Mr. Fellows on the corner one block from there. He related to me a con¬ 
versation that he had with them, that still further impressed upon me the 
importance that something ought to be done. He told me that he thought 
he had said enough to them, so that this conversation about money would 
stop. The conversation with him was dropped. I came back to tbe hotel 
and about supper time I said to Col. Little, while we were waiting—1 asked 
him if it was right for us to go back to Saginaw without apprising some 
proper person of what had transpired with reference to this money talk. He 
hesitated quite a little about suggesting any course. He finally said, “Mr. Cross- 
man boards here; he has had a great deal of experience and is a man of good 
judgment, you had better speak to him about it.” So after tea I came out 
into the reading room. Mr. Crossman, to whom I had been introduced on a 
former occasion, was sitting there. I spoke to him and said I wished to 
have a few minutes’ conversation with him privately, and we went apart, and 
without going into particulars minutely, but enough to state to him in sub¬ 
stance that 1 wanted to communicate to the proper officer of this House a mat¬ 
ter that pertained to the conduct of a member of this House, I asked him 
who the proper person was for me to see, whether it was the Speaker of this 
House or the Governor. He said if it was a matter that pertained to this 
House the Speaker of the House would be the proper person. He remarked 
that he had an appointment at the capitol that evening and was coming up 
here, and he thought the Speaker would be about the House and he would find 
him for me. We came up to the Speakers room. That was the evening of 
the 19th, perhaps 7 o’clock. We went into the Speaker’s room. He went 
somewhere and found the Speaker, brought him into the room. It is my 
recollection that while he was looking for the Speaker, or immediately after, 
one of the gentlemen whose name had been alluded to was met by him, and he 
either brought him into the room or he was in there when we went it, I won’t 
say which. 

Q. What time was that? 

A. About 7 o’clock in the evening of the 19th. I said to the Speaker I had 
a matter I wanted to talk with him about privately, and he and I engaged 
in a private converation about it. I briefly gave him the outlines of it. I 
said to him, “If this is a matter that you think ought to have some atten¬ 
tion on your part I will leave it in your hands; but if you think I have been 
over-zealous in calling your attention to it excuse it in me and let it remain a 
private matter.” He replied that it was certainly a matter of importance; 
just what course ought to be taken he was unable to suggest at that moment. 
After some little reflection he said: “ There are, I believe, one or two other 
gentlemen whose names are involved; perhaps we had better consult 
them.” 


8 


58 


Q. Who are they? 

A. I do not recollect their names. It strikes me that Mr. Diekema is one. 

Q. Who else? 

A. I would not say that there was another, but it strikes me that Mr. Her¬ 
rington, but I may not be right about that. Mr. Diekema may have been the 
only one. I think that while we were talking about it Representative Bates, 
chairman of the committee on municipal corporations, came into the room. 
I think the Speaker invited him to remain. I think he took a seat. That is 
my recollection of the course of events. The Speaker then said to them that 
this was a private matter which I had related to him, which he thought he 
ought to lay before them, and he requested me to relate it to him in detail just 
as it had happened. All of the conversation was private. It was spoken of, 1 be¬ 
lieve, by gentlemen who were there, that the matter should remain entirely 
private so as not to hurt anybody nor to create any interest at all until it could 
be considered over night, and they would have a consultation in the morning 
and determine whether anything should be done about it. We separated, each 
one with the understanding that the matter was to be a private matter. 

Q. Who was it that was together with you and agreed that it should be a 
private matter? 

A. I think the Speaker, and Mr. Grossman I think was present, and I am 
certain Mr. Diekema, and I believe Mr. Bates. The matter was talked over 
generally. I won’t say they each one said so, but it was concurred in that it 
should be kept as a confidential matter until there had been a consultation 
and it had been thought of over night to see what would be done about it. 

Q. You have brought it up to the time of this conference with the gentle¬ 
men that you have named? 

A. Not quite. The next morning, about ten o’clock, or just before— 

Q. What day would that be? 

A. The 20th. 1 came into this hall, the Speaker of the House spoke to me 

and said they bad had a conference with reference to this matter, and had re¬ 
quested that I should put it in writing, briefly stating the facts, and suggested that 
I might step into his room and do so. I stepped into his room and wrote the 
communication which I afterwards presented to him and put it into my pocket. 
When 1 came back from dinner I put it into an envelope, saw Mr. Grossman, 
the clerk, handed it to him, as I supposed he was the proper person to hand a 
communication to for the Speaker, as [did not see the Speaker, for both of 
them had been in this interview, and I think in fact the Speaker said: 
“Hand it to me or Mr. Grossman and he will hand it to me.” Mr. Grossman 
glanced at it. I told him what it was, and says he: “Perhaps that had bet¬ 
ter be a sworn statement.” I said: “Very well.” We stepped either into 
the clerk’s room or the Speaker’s room and Mr. Grossman drew the affidavit 
which is attached to it, and I left it in his care. 

Q. That covers the whole transaction from the time you commenced down 
in the saloon inquiring into the condition of things up here and what you may 
have done up to the time the letter was addressed to the Speaker ? 

A. Yes; so far as I remember. There were other things took place. In 
the meantime I had spoken to Mr. Little. 

Q. Did you see Mr. Tillotson after you got this roll call into your pocket? 

A. I did. 

Q. Did he ask you to give that roll call back to him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or to give it to him ? 


59 


A. No, sir. 

Q. Didn’t he tell you that he wanted that roll call, or give you to under» 
stand that he wanted the paper that those marks had been made upon? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Mr. Tillotson did not? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What did you say, if anything, with reference to it? 

A. Nothing whatever. 

Q. At the time you were in the saloon you asked Mr. Dakin if it wouldn’t 
get you into trouble as you stated in your communication? 

A. I asked him if it wouldn’t be likely to get us all into trouble. 

Q. Whom do you mean by that? 

A. All of us. 

Q. W'hy did you ask him that question? 

A. I said to him, “Is this a prudent thing to be talking about money in this 
way ; won’t it get all of us into trouble?” 

Q. Why did you ask Mr. Dakin that question? 

A. I wanted to see what he thought about it. 

Q. Didn’t you know what you thought about it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you were asking him for the purpose of drawing him out upon that 
subject? 

A. I wanted to see what the fact was. 

Q. Did you tell him during that entire conversation that you thought there 
would be anything wrong in doing just what you asked him to do or just what 
he said he could do? 

A. I did not suggest to him that it was wrong. 

Q. You rather gave him to understand that what he was doing was all 
right? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You did not tell him that it was not all right? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. But you did ask him to make those figures and those marks as you have 
testified ? 

A. Just as I have testified. 

Q. You appeared in the Speaker’s room when these gentlemen were there 
and interrogated Mr. Dakin? 

A. No, sir. I appeared there and asked him one or two or three questions. 

Q. Who asked you to do that? Did anyone ask you? 

A. I cannot say that there did. 

Q. You were following him up then on your own account? 

A. I thought that he had— 

Q. Please answer the question. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Whose account were you following him up on? 

A. I wanted to call his attention to a part of the conversation that he had 
omitted. 

Q. What did you want to call his attention to that for? Who asked you 
to? 

A, I was there by invitation. 

Q. Who asked you to put those questions? 

A. No person. 


60 


Q. You put those questions upon your own motion? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Isn’t it true that you have got a good deal of antipathy and enmity for 
Mr. Dakin, and have had for a long time? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Isn’t it true that you have made che statement to several different ones 
that would indicate that state of feeling? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was Mr. Tillotson, with whom you talked about the charter, the gentle¬ 
man whom Milo H. Dakin defeated for a seat in this Legislature? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You and Mr. Dakin were rather acting in concert during this entire time 
until this matter was made up there, were you not, with reference to what 
could be done with the members of the Legislature? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You stated this morning in your direct examination that Mr. Dakin 
said that if he should go to a man and make him any promises and then he 
should not get the money he would go back on him. You discussed the 
matter from beginning to end in this conversation here in the capitol 
building? • 

A. No, sir; that took place in the restaurant. 

Q. Did you not tell him in the presence of Mr. Fellows that you would see 
to it that the money was forthcoming to Mr. Fellows for the purpose of doing 
what was suggested? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. I would like to have you fix the place? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to it as incompetent. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—The gentleman certainly must know that he has 
got to lay the proper foundation before asking such a question as that. 

The Speaker—The Chair understands the gentleman to say that Mr. Dakin 
was present. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—It does not make any difference about that. If 
we are to proceed under the rules.of evidence he has no right to ask such a 
question until he lays the proper foundation. If I understand it the courts 
will not hold that the witness is bound to answer the question until he lays the 
proper foundation, and he has not laid the proper foundation yet. 

The Speaker—I think the question is proper, if it was during the time Mr. 
Dakin was present. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin ever ask you for any money? 

A. When? 

Q. Did he ever ask you for any money? 

A. Except as I have testified to-day he never did. 

Q You know that that is not a proper answer. I cannot remember what 
you testified to as you can, and will you please answer me, yes or no, whether 
or not Mr. Dakin ever asked you for any money on earth? 

A. No, sir, he never did. 

Q. Directly or indirectly ? 

A. Directly or indirectly. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin or Mr. Fellows or either of them tell you that Mr. Shack- 
leton had gone home to Saginaw City for the purpose of seeing Representative 
Linton to fix up the Saginaw City charter? 

^ A. When and where? 


61 


Q. When you met them here on the 19th of April. 

A. At what place? 

Q. In the capitol building. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did they tell you so during that time at all? 

A. At the conversation at the restaurant— 

Q. I ask you, did they tell you so that day at all? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did they tell you anything in connection with any matter that he was go¬ 
ing to fix up with Representative Linton regarding the charter, either that day 
or the day following? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did that occur? 

A. During the 19th. 

Q. Whereabouts? 

A. It was talked at the restaurant. 

Q. Who talked to you about that? 

A. That matter was alluded to two or three times. 

Q. By whom? 

A. By Mr. Dakin. 

Q. By Mr. Fellows also? 

A. I don’t remembe*' whether Mr. Fellows spoke of that or not. 

Q. Is it not true that Mr. Fellows is the only one on that occasion, the 19th 
or 20th day of April, who told you that Mr. Shackelton was going to bring 
money for his (Fellows) expenses, and that he came here as one of a commit¬ 
tee named in Saginaw, of whom ex-Governor Jerome and some other gentle¬ 
men were members ? 

A. That was not said on that occasion. 

Q. On either occasion ? 

A. No, sir ; not in that language. 

Q. Well, put it in language of your own choosing. State it in language as 
you understand it. 

A. There was talk about money to pay expenses. I don’t remember that 
there was any talk about his coming as a member of a committee, of whom 
Governor Jerome was one, or any conversation of that kind. 

Q. Did not Mr. Fellows tell you, and did you not so understand that if there 
was any money sent down here, either by wire or otherwise, that it was to go to 
Mr. Fellows for his services, and for his time and attention given to the city 
charter? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Who was present on the street when you had this conversation on the 
corner of Washington and Michigan avenues? 

A. With whom? 

Q. With Dakin. 

A. Mr. Fellows and Mr. Crowly. 

Q. Are you sure that Mr. OrowJy was present upon that occasion? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did not Mr. Crowly come up afterwards? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was Mr. Smith there? 

A. No, sir. I left Mr. Smith in the building here. 


62 


Q. Who was it, if anyone, that asked you to give up this roll call that has 
been exhibited here, after you left the restaurant? 

A. No person whatever. 

Q. There never has from that time to this? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you talked with several members of the Legislature except the con¬ 
versations you have related upon the stand, about Mr. Dakin in any particular 
or any capacity? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With how many members of the Legislature have you talked? 

A. I have talked with Senator Wisner and with Representative Snow; I 
donH remember that I have talked with others. 

Q. Is it not true that you have expressed your opinion with regard to Mr. 
Snow on several occasions to members of the Legislature, including Mr. Wisner 
and Mr. Snow? 

A. What opinion? 

Q. Yours, of Mr. Dakin? 

Mr. Goodrich—I object to this question. If it is for the purpose of impeach¬ 
ment I say that he must lay the foundation. I think the rule is plain and 
clear. If this question is asked for the purpose of impeachment he must lay 
the proper foundation before he is entitled to put the question. 

The Speaker—The Chair is of the opinion that it is a proper question. He 
may answer if he can. 

A. I do not recollect having expressed any opinion of Mr. Dakin to any 
member. 

Q. Then you have not expressed any opinion regarding Mr. Dakin to any 
of the members of the Legislature? 

A. I do not recall that I have. 

Q. Don’t you know that you have, on several occasions, at least two or more, 
taken pains to criticise and denounce Mr. Dakin? 

Mr. Herrington—I object to that as repetition. It has been answered twice. 
When will we get through if this course is continued? 

Mr. Dodge—It is not a question of when we get through. 

Mr. Herrington—I object to it as having been answered twice already. 

The Speaker—The Chair is of the opinion that it is a repetition of the for¬ 
mer questions, and the answer would be nothing more than the answers to the 
former questions. The witness need not answer the question. 

Q. Isn’t it true that you have taken a very active part in the prosecution of 
this case, commencing from the time that you met Mr. Dakin here in the Cap¬ 
itol, up until the present time? Answer that yes or no. 

Mr. Herrington—I object to that as incompetent. He can ask the witness 
what he has done, let him state the facts, and then leave it for the house to 
judge whether he has taken an active part or not. 

Mr. Dodge—That certainly is a fair question. What they suggest can be 
explained on re-direct examination. 

The Speaker—The chair is of the opinion that it would be proper to ask the 
witness what he has done. 

Mr. Dodge—Wouldn’t it save time to put the question in the way I have al¬ 
ready stated it? If he has not, that will end it right there and I will not un¬ 
dertake to go into the details. 

The Speaker—It would be merely a matter of opinion with him anyway. 


63 


Mr. Dodge—But we could judge of the animus, and the statement of the 
witness is the best evidence of those facts. 

The Speaker—Ask him what he has done? 

Mr. Dodge—I will withdraw that question. Strike it out. 

Mr. Herrington—We object to his striking anything out. 

Q. What have you done with reference to the prosecution in this case from 
the day, as the chair decides—I believe the question was originally from the 
day that you met Mr. Dakin here on the 19th day of April—up until the 
presenttime ? 

Mr. Goodrich—I object to that. He has been all over this ground, and as 
to what the witness has,done in this case from that time to the present 
time. 

The Speaker—If there is anything that the witness has done that he has not 
stated he may state. 

Mr. Dodge>—I acted on the suggestion of the chair. 

The Speaker—The chair did not intend nor did the counsel expect that he 
could ge all over this matter again. 

Q. Is there anything that you have done iii this transaction to aid the pros 
ecution that you have not already stated ? 

A. There is. 

Q. Will you please state it ? 

A. When the Sergeant-at-arms came to Saginaw to subpoena witness he 
came to my office and subpoenaed me, and then inquired of me where he could 
find the other witnesses; showed me his list, and I told him they were all with¬ 
in a distance of three or four blocks of us and I would go and show them to 
him, as they were strangers to him mostly. I went with him and in the course 
of 15 minutes or half an hour we had found the witnesses and he subpoenaed 
them. Further than that I do not recall anything that I have done particu¬ 
larly to aid the prosecution. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Gotlieb Stork of Saginaw? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you acquainted with John Wines of East Saginaw? 

A. I think I have seen him. 

Q And Henry Readly? 

A. I don’t recall the name. 

Q. Did you say in the presence of either or both of these gentlemen that you 
would give five hundred dollars to have Mr. Dakin caught or trapped, or words 
to that effect? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—That is objected to. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Mr. Conduct >y Goodrich—I object to the question on the same ground 
that I did before, that the foundation is not properly laid. Evidently this is 
for the purpose of impeachment. I would like to have the gentleman state if 
it is not for that purpose, for what purpose he does ask the question. 

Mr. Holden—The question is not completed. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I move to strike out the answer of the witness. 

The Speaker—The answer will be stricken out for the present. 

Mr. Dodge—I am unable to state the date, but it was on an occasion that 
you and Albert Trask were trying lawsuit in a justice court, in Saginaw City. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—What was the date? 

Mr. Dodge—I cannot give the date except to fix it at the time they were try¬ 
ing this lawsuit. 


64 


Mr. OoQductor Snow—We object to it unless they give the time and place. 

The Speaker—The date is very important. 

Mr. Holden—May I be allowed to state that the information which you have 
is by message from another, and we are unable to fix the date nearer than that, 
but that is a circumstance which will enable the witness to fix it, and will hence 
be sufficient for his protection. 

Q. I think Mr. Stork was a party to the suit or a witness in it at least. The 
time was sometime probably within a month. It is not very recent. That is 
as nearly as we can place it at present, 

The Speaker—Was it before this transaction began? 

Mr. Dodge—Yes, sir. 

The Speaker—The chair holds it not to be proper. 

Q. Did not Mr. Dakin on these several occasions when you have met him and 
had conversation, as has been related here in your testimony, on the 19th and 
20th of April, say to you over and over again that there was not a member of 
the Legislature that could be approached with money or in any corrupt way, 
and that there could not be a dollar of money used corruptly here in the Leg¬ 
islature? Answer that if you please, yes or no. 

A. Mo, sir, he did not. 

Q. Did he ever say to you that money could not be used with any of the 
members of the Legislature for corrupt purposes? 

A. I heard him make that statement. 

Q. When? 

A. When he was in the Speaker’s room with the fifteen gentlemen whose 
names he had checked upon this roll. 

Q. Did you ever hear him make substantially that statement before ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he not say to you repeatedly on these several occasions, and especi¬ 
ally in this restaurant, that the members of the Legislature were honest men 
in so far as he had any knowledge, and that they could not be approached with 
money, or words to that effect? 

A. He made no such statement. 

Q. Did he not say that money could not be used for any corrupt purposes? 

A. He made no such statement. 

Q. Did he not say to you in the presence of Mr. Fellows and of Mr. Crowley 
that he had a very high opinion of the men that he had checked off on that 
House roll-call, and that they were among the ablest and best members of the 
House? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he not say to you in the presence of those gentlemen on various oc¬ 
casions that money could not be used in any way corruptly, and that if it could 
be used he would have nothing to do with it whatever? 

A. He made no such statement. 

Q. Nor nothing of that import or meaning? 

A. Nothing of that import or meaning. 

Q. His statements to you, then, if I understand you correctly, were on each 
and every oceasion to the effect that money could be used for corr upt pur¬ 
poses? 

A. That was his statement. 

Q. And that statement he made several times before these parties, as I un¬ 
derstand it? 

A. He did. 


65 


Q. What if anything did Mr. Dakin have to say to yon about money being 
used with members of the Gr. A. R. in the House? 

A. When I asked him, while sitting in the restaurant, in what manner he 
proposed to make use of this money, he stated that he was well acquainted 
with a good many members of the G. A. R. 

Q. This is Mr. Dakin you are talking about? 

A. This is Mr. Dakin. He stated that he was well acquainted with a good 
many of the Grand Army members; that there were a good many of them 
in the House. I think the number that he stated was thirty-four. 

Q. I beg your pardon. Did you once before state what Dakin had said with 
reference to the G. A. R. men ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I had forgotten. I was thinking that was what Fellows had said to you. 

I will withdraw that question. I do not care to go over it again. I see on the 
House Journal that gives the specifications, dollar marks are placed opposite 
of each figure on that list. The list has not been introduced in evidence yet, 
and I have not seen it. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—The list has been introduced in evidence. 

Mr. Dodge—Where is it ? 

The original list was produced. 

Q. This is in just the shape that it was when you reported it to the House ? 

A. Except the marks on the back, “F. L. E., April 19, 1887.’’ That is all 
the difference. 

Q. This House roll-call you say you carried it in your pocket for over a 
month? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In your vest pocket? 

A. I carried it in my diary. 

Q. How did the dullar marks come to be placed against the figures, do you 
know? 

A. Where? 

Q. I don’t suppose you do know. I think that is all. 

Mr. Diekema—That is all, Mr. Eaton. 

A. There was one question asked, and I was interrupted in my answer. I 
would like to complete my answer. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—What was it? 

A, I was asked about my appointment as city attorney, and whether there 
was not some disappointment about it with reference to the vote for it. I de¬ 
sire to complete what I was about to say, that I never solicited the appoint¬ 
ment of city attorney, nor had any disappointment at not being confirmed for 
a second year. 

Mr. Holden—You have stated that fully. 

Mr. Herrington—That is explained sufficiently. 

Counsel for Representative Dakin then presented his formal answer to the 

specific charges, which, by stipulation, at the opening of the case, were 

allowed to be made nunc pro tunc, as follows: 

STATE OF MICHIGAN. 

In the matter of articles exhibited on behalf of the special committee of the 
House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, appointed April 20th, 1887, 

9 


66 


against Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives, from the 
First Representative District of Saginaw county, in relation to the charges 
preferred against him for misfeasance, malfeasance, or venal and corrupt con¬ 
duct in office. 

I. 

The said Milo H. Dakin, Representative as aforesaid, for answer unto the 
said articles preferred against him—for answer unto article 1, answering, de¬ 
nies that he, the said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representa¬ 
tives aforesaid, unmindful of the high duties of his office, of his oath of office 
or otherwise, did corruptly or otherwise, on the 19th day of April, 1887, or at 
any other time, or at all, receive from John H. Shackleton, mayor of Saginaw 
City, or from any other person, certain sums of money, or any money at all, 
for the purpose of corruptly using the same among, the members of the 
House of Representatives of the Michigan Legislature in influencing votes for 
the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw City, or any other bill 
then pending before the committee, or any committee, of the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives. 

II . 

Answering the second article of specific charges this respondent denies that 
unmindful of the high duties of his office, of his oath of office, or otherwise, he 
did corruptly on the 19th day of April, 1877, or at any other time, solicit or 
endeavor to procure money from John H. Shackelton, mayor of Saginaw City, 
or from Frederic L. Eaton, of Saginaw, or from any other persons, for the 
purpose ostensibly or otherwise, of corruptly using such money among the mem¬ 
bers of the House of Representatives of the Michigan State Legislature to in¬ 
fluence their votes, or otherwise, in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the 
charter of Saginaw City, then pending before the committee on labor interests 
and municipal corporations of said House of Representatives, denies that he did 
on the said 19th day of April, or at any other time, solicit or endeavor to pro¬ 
cure money from said John H. Shackelton or from Frederic L. Eaton, or 
from any other persons or person, for the purpose of corruptly or unlawfully 
appropriating all or any part of such money or any money at all for his own 
personal use or benefit. 

III. 

Answering to the third article of specific charges, this respondent denies that 
he, the said Milo H. Dakin, representative as aforesaid, unmindful of the 
high duties of his office, or otherwise, did on the 19th day of April, 1887, or at 
any other time, make a list of names of certain or any members of the said 
House of Representatives, together with the amounts of money necessary to 
procure the vote or influence of each of said members named in said list in 
favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw City, or any 
other bill, pending before the committees on labor interests and municipal 
corporations jointly, or otherwise. And denies that he made, as alleged in 
said articles of specific charges, any such list of names, with the figures and 
characters set opposite said names, as is set out in said third article of specific 
charges; and denies that he made any list of names, with any figures or char¬ 
acters opposite the same, for the purpose or with the intent or understanding 
set forth in said article third. And denies that he, the said Milo H. Dakin, 
did at any time represent to the said Frederic L. Eaton, or to any other per¬ 
son, that to secure the vote? or in^uence of the members of the House of 


67 


RepreseDtatives aforesaid, whose names are set forth in said article third, or 
any other members of said House, it would be necessary to use with each of 
them the amount of money set opposite his name in said list or any money at 
all. 

IV. 


Answering the fourth article of specific charges, this respondent denies that 
he, the said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives as afore¬ 
said, unmindful of the high duties of his office, or otherwise, did corruptly on 
the 19th day of April, A. D. 1887, or at any other time solicit or endeavor to 
procure money from John H. Shackelton, mayor of Saginaw City, Frederic L. 
Eaton, or from any other person or persons, for the purpose of corruptly using 
such money so obtained among the members of the said House of Representa¬ 
tives, to influence their votes or efforts in favor of the passage of said bill to 
amend the charter of the said city of Saginaw, pending before said committees 
as aforesaid. 

And this respondent, further answering, says that he never obtained or 
solicited any money at all, at any time, from any person for corrupt use with 
or among any of the members of the said House of Representatives; and that 
he denies each and every of the allegations made and contained in the said 
several articles of specific charges; and hereby prays the judgment of this, the 
honorable House of Representatives, upon the truth of this his answer ;;[and 
that he may be acquitted of the said several specific charges. 

Respectfully submitted. 

MILO H. DAKIN, 

Respondent, 

L. C. HOLDEN. 

FRANK L. DODGE, 

PHILIP T. VANZILE, 


STATE OP MICHIGAN 1 
County of Ingham, j 


Of Counsel for Respondent, 


Milo H. Dakin, being by me duly sworn, says that he has read the fore¬ 
going answer by him subscribed, and that he knows the contents thereof; that 
the same is true, except the matters stated in said answer to be upon informa¬ 
tion and belief, and as to those matters, he believes the same to be true. 

SEYMOUR FOSTER, 

Notary PuUic for Ingham County^ Michigan, 


Representative Rumsey sworn. 

Examined by Mr. Herrington. 

Q. You are a member of the present House of Representatives? 

A. I am. 

Mr. Dodge—VVe object to that as the record is the best evidence. 

Q. Were you present in the Speaker’s room on the 20th day of April, 1887? 
A. On the 20th. 

Q. State who were present on that occasion. 

A. Speaker Markey was present, Diekema, Bentley, Dunbar, O’Keefe, Burr, 
Manly, Baldwin, S. Baker, Mr. McCormick, Mr. Herrington and myself. 

Q. Who was sent for soon after assembling in that room? 

A. Mr. Dakin. Mr. Eaton was also present. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin come to the room? 


68 


A. He did. 

Q. About what time of day? 

A. I think it must have been nearly 4 o’clock—between three and four. It 
was soon after the House had resolved itself into the committee of the whole on 
the general order in the afternoon. 

Q. State if Mr. Dakin made certain statements there in relation to his con¬ 
nection with the matter in controversy? 

A. He did. 

Q. Were those statements taken down in writing? 

A. They were. 

Q. And signed by Mr. Dakin? 

A. By Mr. Dakin. 

Q, What have you there? 

A. These are the statements that were taken down. 

Q. Look at the signature at the close of the statement. Whose signature is 
that? 

A. I saw Mr. Dakin sign that. 

Q. Milo H. Dakin, Representative in this Legislature from the county of 
Saginaw? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State whether that was read over to him before he signed it. 

A. It was. 

CROSS EXAMINATION BY JUDGE VAN ZILE. 

Q. At whose instance was this meeting convened? 

A. I can’t tell you. I was notified while I sat in my seat to go into the 
Speaker’s room when the House resolved itself into the committee of the 
whole on the general order. 

Q. Did you find all of the gentlemen you have mentioned in the room when 
you arrived there? 

A. My impression is that they were all there. 

Q. Dakin was not there, I think you said? 

A. Mr. Dakin was not there. 

Q. Did you discuss this matter before you were sent for? 

A. I heard the communicaaion read and the roll-call was shown me, with 
the figures, and the members among themselves counseled what to do, and it 
was decided that Mr. Dakin should be sent for and let him make a statement, 

Q. Was there a good deal of excitment at that meeting? 

A. No. 

Q. Were the gentlemen who were present at all exci ed apparently? 

A Not very much. Some of them were indignant. 

Q. Did they express their indignation? 

A. If they did they did it very quietly. 

Q. Did they express their indignation after Mr. Dakin came? 

A. No. sir. 

Q. Who first addressed Mr. Dakin? 

A. I think the Speaker showed him the roll-call and asked him if he made 
those marks in figures on the roll call—if those were his figures. I think that 
was the first question asked. 

Q. Was this gentleman Mr. Eaton, Mr. Eaton, present at that time? 

A. Yes, sir. , 

Q. Did he ask any questions? 


69 


A. Not then. 

Q. Did he at any time during the meeting? 

A. He asked some questions after Mr. Herrington got through. 

Q. Of whom? 

A. Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Was that after Mr. Dakin had made his statement or before? 

A. That was after. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin answer the questions that he asked? 

A. He did some of them, and some of them I think he refused to answer. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin, at that time, appear somewhat excited? 

A. I think he was remarkably cool. 

Q. Who wrote this statement? 

A. Mr. Herrington. 

Q. Was it written in long hand, and as it appears now at first? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There was no stenographer there? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Who asked the questions that purport to have been asked and written in 
the statement here ? 

A. I think most of the questions were asked by Mr. Herrington and he took 
them down in writing. 

Q. Does this statement contain all the statements that were made at that 
meeting by Mr. Dakin ? 

A. All that I heard. I never saw that until to-day, since that time. 

Q. Have you read this over ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Can you now say that this contains all tho statement made there by Mr. 
Dakin relative to this matter ? 

A. To the best of my knowledge and belief it does. 

Q. Mr. Herrington must have been writing during all the time Dakin was 
there making his statement concerning the mattei ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Does it contain the questions and answers between him and Mr. Eaton ? 

A. Shall I state any question Mr. Eaton asked him? 

Q. I had not looked it over. If you remember about that I wish you would 
state. 

A. Mr. Eaton asked the question “What did you say in relation to the 
Grand Army men?’’ 

Q. Does this statement contain all of the statements, questions and answers 
made between Eaton and Dakin? 

A. All that I recollect. 

Q. If we read this statement we will find everything that was answered on 
the part of Mr. Dakin, and every question that was asked him at that meet¬ 
ing? 

A. I don’t know. I guess you will. I think so. 

Q. You think we will? 

A. I think he refused to answer some questions that Mr. Eaton asked him. 

Q. You think there was not any statement on the part of Mr. Dakin or any 
question asked on the part of any one of the gentlemen present on that occa¬ 
sion but we will find the answer here? 

A. That I will not answer by yes or no, because I cannot. There may have 
been something asked and answered that was not taken. 


70 


Q. Is it not quite probable that there was a good deal of talk there that is not 
in this statement? 

A. I don’t think it is—not very much. There was but very little talking 
done except what was done by Dakin. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin understand that everything he said was to be taken down? 

A. It was read over to him. 

Q. I understand that, but did he understand that everything he was saying 
was being written down? 

A. I don’t know how he could have understood differently. 

Q. Did he state it slow, so that it could be written word for word, or is this 
writing simply the substance of the conversation? 

A. I think it is in his own language. I know in one particular when it was 
read over he wished to have a correction made. 

Q. You understand that Mr. Herrington could not have written in long hand 
unless Mr. Dakin han stated slowly what was to be written? 

A. I understand that. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin speak with the usual rapidity that one does in conver¬ 
sation? 

A. He answered a question, and after that question was taken he was asked 
another. 

Q. Was the question, first written and then asked him? 

A. I don’t know whether the question was written or not; I think it was; 
I think in some instances tho question was written. 

Q. As you look through this will you state whether or not there appears in 
that statement to exceed half a dozen questions, and I think likely three or 
four will cover it ? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to that; the paper itself will show how 
many questions. 

Judge Van Zile—It certainly will, and I will give it to him for the sake of 
refreshing his memory. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to that question as incompetent, be¬ 
cause the writing itself is the best evidence of what it contains. 

The Speaker—The Chair is of the opinion that the number of questions can 
be ascertained from the paper. 

Judge Van Zile—I put it for the purpose of refreshing the witness’s rec¬ 
ollection. 

The Speaker—The witness has not stated how many questions there were. 

Judge Van Zile—But the witness has stated this is not stated in narrative 
form. 

A. I see in most places there are answers to questions. 

Q. After looking that over can you state whether or not those questions were 
written and then read over to him, or whether or not that was taken as the 
substance of the questions or the substance of the answers? 

A. I think these were in answer to to the written communication as made by 
Mr. Eaton largely. 

Q. It may be true, but there were questions asked him orally, were there 
not? 

A. There were some. 

Q. And it is pretended that they are written down? 

A. I do not know that it is pretended that they are written down. 

Q. Is it or not, pretended? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to that. The paper will show for itself. 


71 


The Speaker—The paper will show. 

Judge Yan Zile—Is it possible that the gentlemen will object to my finding 
out whether this was taken word for word as it would be by a stenographer or 
whether it is the substance? 

The Speaker—He has already answered the question once or twice. 

Judge Van Zile—I have not heard the answer. 

A. It is taken as he answered. 

Q. Word for word? 

A. Yes, sir, as I understand, and as he understood it at that time. 

Q. I will ask you again if Mr. Dakin on that occasion talked slow so that 
one could write each word that he said, or whether he talked with his usual ra¬ 
pidity? 

A. He did not speak a word and then Mr. Herrington write that word, but 
he gave his evidence so that it would be taken in long hand as it is taken 
there. 

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HERRINGTON. 

Q. State who first began questioning Mr. Dakin ? 

A. Mr. Markey did. 

Q. State whether any others than Mr. Markey and Mr. Herrington ques¬ 
tioned him. To refresh your recollection state whether Mr. Diekema asked 
him questions. 

A. I think Mr. Diekema did ask him some questions. 

Q. To refresh your recollection further, state whether Mr. Manly suggested 
a question. 

A. Yes, sir; Mr. Manly asked him a question. I am not certain but what 
I did. 

Q. State where Mr. Herrington sat when he wrote this. 

A. He sat at the table in the Speaker’s room, on the west side of the table. 

Q. Where did Mr. Dakin stand with reference to Mr. Herrington ? 

A. He sat at the end of the table. 

Q. How many feet away? 

A. Three and a half or four. 

Q. State if he could see what was being written. 

A. I think he could if he had wished to. 

Q. State whether after a question was asked the answer was taken down be¬ 
fore another question was put. 

A. It was. 

Mr. Herrington—I now offer in evidence this statement. 

The statement was read by the clerk as follows: 

Mr. Markey shows Dakin slip and asks: 

“Are those figures in your handwriting ?” 

A. Those figures are mine. I wanted money to get together and have a 
social time with you fellows and talk over our bill. This occurred down 
here in a saloon in Lansing. Mr. Fellows, ex-alderman, Mr. David Crowley, 
Kecorder of Saginaw, Mr. Eaton and myself were present. That is what I 
said. I considered you men were the leading men of the House. I never 
spoke to any of you men abont the bill or about any money. My 
association with you gentlemen is such that I do not think you could be 
bought. I did it on purely business principles. The mayor gave me 
two dollars to buy some beer with. This was yesterday morning. The 
mayor handed Fellows $5 as Fellows told me. I assure that it was done as 


72 


a business matter. I told Mr. Eaton that I did not want the money to bribe 
anybody. I wanted to get our charter through and I wanted some money. 
I put down the amount I expected I would need. I put down different 
amounts according as I thought you gentlemen had influence in the House. 
I did not say that when I found a man who would not take the money I 
would send him to Fellows. I thought I would need the money because 
there was a fight between Saginaw City and East Saginaw. I intended to 
use the money principally at one feast. I intended to have this feast down 
at the Eichle House. I did not tell Eaton that I intended to have a feast. 
I have not known of money being used here this winter in the way I proposed. 
The figures on that slip are in my handwriting. I expected that 
what I told Eaton would be confidential between him and myself. I 
think Mr. Eaton intimated that be would try to get the money. Mr. Fellows 
said he had used some of his money. Mr. Herrington never said one word to 
me alone since I met him. We have never talked together except in a crowd. 
I have never been out with any of you gentlemen present, to-wit: Speaker 
Markey, Diekema, Kumsey, Bentley, Dunbar, O’Keefe, Burr, Manly, Baldwin, 
S. Baker, McCormick and Herrington; and I never treated any of you gentle¬ 
men. I told Eaton that I wanted the money to get together with you boys, and 
that I wanted the money to buy cigars and buy something to drink. I don’t 
know as any of you gentlemen drink liquor. I know of some who smoke. I 
have never seen any of you gentlemen drink but Mr. O’Keefe. I have drank 
with him. I have seen three of you men smoke, and no more. I considered this 
an honorable thing to do. I did not intend to let you know whose money 
was feasting you. I did not intend to speak of the bill in connection with the 
feast. I did not expect this feast would influence your votes at all. I did not 
have the intention of influencing your votes by this feast only casually. I ex¬ 
pected the mayor of Saginaw would raise this money. I expected him to hand 
the money to me. I told Mr. Eaton that he, Eaton, if he had any money, 
could hand it to Fellows, and I would get the money of Fellows. I do not think 
it would be wrong to take this money, even though I did not expect to indu- 
ence votes. 

QUESTIONED BY MR. EATON. 

Q. State what you said about Grand Army members. 

A. I made no statement about them. I am too much of a man for that, 

Q. Do you remember the remark Mr. Crowley made when you said it would 
take $25 to buy Rumsey ? 

A. I made no such remark. Did not see you in the capitol yesterday morn¬ 
ing. I had no talk with you at all. 

Q. Did you not say that the mayor did not bring down any money and he 
had gone back to get some ? 

A. No; I told Shackelton, the mayor, and Fellows to come down here. 
I have not seen any money used here at all this winter. It was all in good 
faith on my part. I even went so far as to say that there was no bribery. 
Everything I did was done conscientiously. I am on friendly terms with 
Crowley and Fellows. They would make an honest statement. The mayor 
would make an honest statement. I simply intended to have at the feast the 
persons whose names I mentioned on that slip: S. Baker, 6; Baldwin, 
5; Bentley, 5; Burr, 5; Crocker, 10; Diekema, 10; Dunbar, 5; Engleman, 5; 
Herrington, 10; Manly, 10; McCormick, 5; O’Keefe, 5; Perkins, 10; 
Rumsey, 25; T. H. Williams, 10. These figures are intended to represent 
dollars. I intended to use this number of dollars. I did not intend to have 


73 


any others. I put those amounts so that if I went out separately with you 
men I could keep track of the expenses. I expected to go out alone with no 
particular person. Mr. O'Keefe is the only one I ever spent any money with, 
and that was only in the way of a social drink. I never said anything to Mr. 
O’Keefe about this charter. 

The above is a correct statement so far as I know. 

MILO H. DAKIN.” 

Mr. O’Keefe—Mr. Speaker, I wish to inquire if that statement is to appear 
on the J ournai ? 

The Speaker—The paper has been received in evidence and will appear at 
length upon the Journal. 

Mr. O’Keefe—I desire to enter my protest against that statement being 
received and printed as a part of this case, as it is not, as I understand, a 
sworn statement. I desire, and I have offered, that Mr. Dakin and myself be 
sworn in regard to the statements contained in that paper. 

Mr. Herrington—We will have Mr. O’Keefe sworn at once. 

Kichard O’Keefe, being duly sworn, testified as follows: 

Examined by Mr. Herrington. 

Q. You may make any statement that you desire in connection with this 
matter. 

A. I understand from the statement made by Mr. Dakin that it is gener¬ 
ally understood and probably pretty well understood throughout the State 
that I have taken a drink. He also says that he treated me, or drank with 
me. I haven’t any recollection of ever having drank with Mr. Dakin, and 
the only time I was ever in his company was some three or four weeks ago. 
Coming from breakfast one morning, I met him on Michigan avenue and 
asked him if he would go in and have a cigar—this is my recollection—and 
we went in and I took a cigar myself. I don’t know what Mr. Dakin took; 
my recollection of the matter is that I paid for it myself, .1 haven’t any 
recollection ever of having been in any place of that kind with Mr. Dakin, or 
being in his company probably ten minutes when he was here two years ago 
and this session so far. I have always looked upon Mr. Dakin as 
being an honest man as I supposed. I never was thrown in contact with 
him and never had any conversation in particular with him. I 
make this statement wishing to appear right in this mat¬ 
ter of the drink. I have fouud out to-day that there are 
some others here that drink, as well as I, but I don’t like to go be¬ 
fore the public so ridiculously as it appears to me I have been brought before 
them in this paper that has slipped out of the hands of the fifteen that were 
marked on this list. When we were together there, after Mr. Dakin made 
his statement, I asked some of the persons present if this was to go to the 
papers, that if it was to go to the papers, I preferred having it in a different 
shape. My intentions at that time were that if it was going to the papers, 
that Mr. Dakin and I should both be sworn upon that particular point, and I 
was promised by some of them that it should not go to the papers. Yet the 
next morning I found my name in very bold letters at the bottom of a state¬ 
ment. 

CROSS-EXAMINED BY MR. HOLDEN. 

Q. Do you understand from this that Mr. Dakin alleges that you have taken 
anything intoxicating, when you speak of drink ? 

10 


74 


A. Yes, that is the way I generally understand it. 

Q. And you understand it in this sense, do you, and that he intended it in 
that sense ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You understand that he charges in this matter that it was while this 
charter was pending, or in consequence of that in any way ? 

A. The inference might have been drawn that that was the case, I think. 

Q His statement as given in the committee room before a number of you 
gentlemen and the honorable Speaker, is not complete, is it ? It is some¬ 
what broken and disconnected ? 

A. I don’t know as to that. The questions were asked and the answers 
taken, and I don’t know how fully they were taken. I think they were taken 
down as well as could be done in that way. 

Q. You do have a recollection of going in and asking Mr. Dakin to take 
something, do you ? 

A. I think I do. 

Q. And you say you are unable to state now from your recollection whether 
he drank or what he drank ? 

A. I don’t remember. 

Q. He may have drank at that time ? 

A. He may. 

Q. Now, inasmuch as you asked for the special privilege of explaining, I 
desire, upon the part of Mr. Dakin, to say to you in the presence of the 
House and to go upon the record that Mr. Dakin never intended by the state¬ 
ment to lead any inference whatever that this had anything to do whatever 
with the charter bill or any other bill pending, but was merely in the way of 
a social gathering? 

A. Well, he made that statement there as it appears. 

Q. And that he does not intend to charge you with being a person who 
drinks intoxicants to excess by any means. You have served with him two 
years ago also in this House? 

A. Yes, sir, 

Q. Did not he then until this charge was brought against him bear the rep¬ 
utation of being a scrupulously honest man? 

Mr. Herrington—Do we understand that they now make the witness their 
own? 

Mr. Holden—I am questioning him in regard to his statement. 

Q. Is not that true? 

A. I never heard anything of Mr. Dakin but that he was supposed to be an 
honest man. 

Q. He was so regarded by other members? 

A. I understood it so. 

Q. Mr. Dakin was not regarded as a drinking man either, was he? 

A. I never understood that he was. 

Q. You never saw him intoxicated? 

A. No, sir; I wish to say further that this time I refer to as going in and 
taking a cigar and asking Mr. Dakin to go in, was as far back as the first of 
this month, probably, and that there was not any of that two dollars that he 
speaks of for my expenses. 

Mr. Chapman offered the following: 

Resolved, That this House suspend Eule 1 and take a recess until 7:30 this 
evening. 


75 


On motion of Mr. Jones, 

The resolution was laid upon the table. 
On motion of Mr. Haskins, 

The House adjourned. 


Lansing^ Wednesday, April 27, 1887, 

The House met pursuant to adjournment and was called to order by the 
Speaker. 

Prayer by Eev. Mr. Eoberts. 

Eoll called: quorum present. 

The House resumed the investigation of the charges against Eepresentative 
Dakin. 

The Speaker—The Chair this morning deems it proper to call the attention 
of the members and those present to the importance of not allowing themselves 
to make any demonstration here of their feelings during the trial of this case. 

The members of the committee will now proceed with the investigation. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I am informed by the stenographers that there 
is an error in the printed Journal of yesterday’s proceedings at page 1018, in the 
second question put to Mr. Eumsey. It reads ‘^Were you present in the 
Speaker’s room on the 19th day of April, 1887?” It should read “Were you 
present in the Speaker’s room on the 20th day of April, 1887,” and the answer 
should read “On the 20th.” The mistake was made at the printing office. 

TESTIMONY OF JAY SMITH. 

Jay Smith, being duly sworn, testified as follows: 

EXAMINED BY MR. SNOW. 

Q. Where do you reside? 

A. City of Saginaw. 

Q. What is your age and occupation? 

A. My age is 64, and my occupation is druggist. 

Q, How long have you resided in the city of Saginaw? 

A. Thirty-five years. 

Q. Where were you on the nineteenth of this present month shortly after 
10 o’clock in the morning? 

A. I was for a short time here in the capitol building. I came here with 
Mr. Eaton. 

Q. Did you arrive here at Lansing on the morning train from Saginaw? 

A. Yes, I did. 

Q. About what time did you reach Lansing? 

A. I have no means of knowing except by the arrival of the train. We 
came in on the train coming from Saginaw in the morning. 

Q. Shortly after your arrival in this city where did you go? 

A. We came from the train up town and I stopped for a moment in Mr. 
Wells’s drug store. 

Q. From there where did you go ? 

A. I went directly to the capitol. 

Q. Did you meet anyone with whom you were acquainted when you reached 
the capitol, and if so, who was it? 



76 


A, I found Mr. Eaton on the steps of the capitol. We came up into the 
corridor and there we met Mr. Dakin and Mr, Fellows. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Dakin or the parties you met 
there? 

A. I think as far as I am concerned I had no conversation except to accost 
them as we came in. 

Q. Did vou hear any conversation between the parties there assembled? 

A. I did. 

Q. Who was present ? 

A. Mr. Eaton, Mr. Fellows and Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Mr. Eaton, yourself and Dakin? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Any one else ? 

A. Eo, sir. 

Q. Was Fellows there? 

A. Yes, sir, Mr. Fellows. 

Q. Yourself, Dakin, Eaton and Fellows were present? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you stop there and enter into a conversation there with them, your¬ 
self, or they among themselves? 

A. I was there for a few moments. 

Q. You may state now what if anything you heard said to any one present 
there relative to procuring money for certain purposes? 

A. Following some conversation with Mr. Eaton in regard to the Saginaw 
charter bill he stated— 

Q. Who stated—Mr. Dakin? 

A. Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Now narrate as fully as you can all that you heard said, and tell us who 
said it? 

A. He told Mr. Eaton that nothing would be done on the charter business 
that day. I think in answer to an inquiry from Mr. Eaton he stated that Mr. 
Shackelton had gone back to Saginaw to procure some money. 

Q. Did he say for what purposes? 

A. I will come to it in a moment. He stated that he expected Mr. Shakel- 
ton would fetch some, money with him, but he only brought a little. He had 
given him some but it did not amount to anything, it was all gone. Mr. Eaton 
then asked him what he wanted to do with the money and he said he wanted 
to use it in getting the charter bill passed the House. Mr. Eaton asked him 
what the trouble was, whether there was any difficulty with the committee or 
whether he wanted to use the money with the members of the House. His 
answer was that he wanted to use it with the members of the House. 

Q. Did he say that he wanted to use it with the members of the House for the 
purpose of getting the charter bill through the House? Was that the lan« 
guage that he used ? 

Mr. Dodge.—I object to that method of interrogating the witness; it is lead¬ 

ing. 

The Speaker.—Let the witness tell what took place, what was said. 

A. Mr. Eaton asked him if he meant to be understood that there were legis¬ 
lators whose votes could be obtained by the use of money. His answer was, 
“ Of course.” 

Q. What further was said, if anything? 

A. I don’t remember anything while 1 was there. I think 1 then left and 
came up into the hall and left Mr. Eaton with Mr. Fellows. 


77 


Q. Was there anything said at that time by Mr. Fellows? 

A. I think Mr. Fellows had nearly nothing to say during the conversation. 
I hnow it struck me that he was quite discreet. 

Mr. Conductor Snow—That is all with the witness. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I should like now to have the stenographer 
read the testimony to the House. I don’t think the members have heard any 
part of it. 

The Speaker—-Let the testimony be read. 

The official stenographer read the testimony of the witness as given above. 
Q. I call your attention to this fact. Do you recollect during that conver¬ 
sation of Dakin saying that Shackelton had given them some money, but 
that it did not amount to anything; that it was all gone? 

The Speaker—He has already stated that. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He did not state how much money Shackelton had given him, did he? 

A. I don’t recollect that he did. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. HOLDEN. 

Q. Did he state in what particular manner the money would be expended? 

A. No, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID CROWLEY. 

David Crowley being duly sworn, testified as follows: 

EXAMINED BY MR. CONDUCTOR GOODRICH. 

Q. Where do you reside? 

A. Saginaw City. 

Q. How long have you resided there? 

A. Twenty-one years. 

Q. What is your business ? 

A. Hotel, at present. 

Q. I will ask you if at any time you have been interested in the passage of 
the amendment to the city charter of the city of Saginaw during the present 
session of the Legislature? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you at any time been down here to the capitol on that business? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When was it that you were here? 

A. I think I was here four times in the interest of the charter. I cannot 
remember the dates, except the last time I was here before this time. 

Q. Were you on or about the 19th of the present month? 

A. I was here on the 19th of April. 

Q. What time did you arrive in Lansing on the 19th of April? 

A. About 10 o’clock in the forenoon. 

Q. Who was in company with you at that time? 

A. Mr. Jay Smith, Mr. Eaton and I think Mr. Snow and myself walked 
from the depot to the corner at the City National Bank and we parted there. 

Q. Where did you go: 

A. The first thing I did I went to the Savings Bank and telephoned to Mr. 
Barnes that I wanted to see him that day. 

Q. Who was with you when you went to the Savings Bank? 

A. There was nobody. I left Mr. Snow on the corner. 

Q. What did you do? 


78 


A.. After I telephoned I got word from Mr. Barnes that he would meet mo 
between one and two, and I had nothing else to do, and I went down toward 
the Eichle House. 

Q. Whom did you meet if anybody? 

A. Not anybody that I knew. On my way back, at the corner at the City 
National Bank I met Fellows and Mr. Dakin. They were coming apparently 
from the Capitol. 

Q. Did you have at that time any conversation with Mr. Fellows and Mr.. 
Dakin ? 

A. Yes; we met and shook hands. Some words passed I think, and I asked 
him how things looked for the charter? 

Q. You were acquainted with Mr. Fellows and Mr. Dakin, were you? 

A. Oh, yes. 

Q. How long had you been acquainted with them? 

A. I guess I have known Mr. Dakin four or five years and Mr. Fellows ten 
or twelve. 

Q. Where did they reside ? 

A. In Saginaw City. 

Q. Gro on and state what that conversation was that you had with them at 
that meeting ? 

A. I think Mr. Dakin replied to my answer about the charter, he said things 
looked good, but there would be nothing done to-day, as Shackleton and Linton 
had gone to Saginaw. 

Q. Did either of them say what they had gone to Saginaw for ? 

A. Yes, I think Mr. Fellows took a document out of his pocket with some 
writing on it and said that Linton and Shackleton had gone to Saginaw to 
make some arrangements in regard to Florence, that Linton had promised 
Shackleton that if he would agree to some matters in the interest of Florence, 
in regard to some improvements that ought to be *made upon it provided it 
came into the City of Saginaw and pay for some improvements already made 
for Carleton, that he would not interfere with our charter, providing Mr. 
Dakin would assist him in this charter. 

Q. What was said in relation to the Mayor’s going there ? 

A. Then I think Mr. Dakin said We ought to have some money to-day.” 

I says “ What to do ?” He says, “ Well, to work while Linton is away.” 

Q. To work at what ? 

A. 1 don’t know as it was said any more than the supposition was in the 
interest of the charter. 

Mr. Dodge—Never mind what the supposition was. 

A. Well, he said they ought to have some money to work to-day while Linton 
was away. Shakelton came here yesterday and only had $i0. 

Q. Who said this? 

A. Mr. Dakin, I think. 

Q. What did he say Mr. Shackelton had done with the $10? 

A. He did not say. He said “That was no good.” He says, “Mr. Fellows 
spent $30 yesterday and I spent five or six, all I had.” 

Q. He said that Mr. Dakin spent $30 yesterday. 

A. No, Mr. Fellows. 

Q. Mr. Fellows spent $30 yesterday and he spent five or six dollars, which 
was all he had. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then what did you say in response to that, if anything? 


79 


A. We moved a little ways from the corner where we were standing down 
towards the river and stopped again. I says, “Is it usual to use money in such 
a way? Can money be used in such a way as this in getting this matter 
through?’’ 

Q. What did these gentlemen say in reply to that, if anything? 

A. They said “Certainly, why yes.” 

Q. Who said that? 

A. I think Mr. Dakin. 

Q. What else was said? 

A. Mr. Fellows said something about Gr. A. K. men. He said there were 
some members here in circumstances about like himself and that if he had 
some money he could make it pleasant for them. 

Q. Did he say in what way he intended to make it pleasant for them? 

A. In the way of sociability I should judge from what he said. 

Q. Was there anything else said upon that occasion? 

A. Mr. Eaton I think came in sight then, coining across the street. I 
noticed him, and I says “Here is Mr. Eaton, you can talk this matter with 
him fully; he has had more charge of the thing than I have, propably he 
can decide quicker for you.” 

Q. What was said then? 

A. Mr.Eaton came up and I opened up the subject then. The conversation 
had been going on between me and Dakin and Fellows, and I kind of dropped 
out of it then. There was a good many people passing on the street, and I 
think Mr. Eaton said, “Can not we go and sit down some place?” I am not 
certain, but I think it was him that suggested that we should go and sit down 
some place. I says “Yes, let us go in here to Cottington & Davis.” 

Q. Where was that? 

A. I think they called it the Windsor saloon and restaurant. So I led tho 
way and went into a little room, I think it is off of their dining room, back of 
the bar room and we went in and sat down there. There was a couple of chairs 
in there and a table, and we got two chairs more and sac down by this table* 
Mr. Dakin and Mr. Eaton sat on one side of the table and me and Mr. Fellows, 
on the other side. So the conversation ran between Eaton and Dakin. 

Q. How many were there there at that time in all? 

A. Four. 

Q. Kelate the conversation that was had between you all and between Mr. 
Eaton and Mr. Dakin. 

A. Mr. Dakin and Mr. Eaton commenced talking in regard to the conver¬ 
sation on the streets, and I think somebody connected with the saloon came 
to the door and put his hands on the disc like that, “ Anything wanted, gen¬ 
tlemen ?” I says “Yes, let us have something.” And he took the order for 
what we would have to drink and brought it in. 

Q. What did you order, if you remember ? 

A. Yes, I think there were three of the party took whisky and one took sour 
wine. 

Q. Who took sour wine ? 

A. Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Go on and relate the conversation that was had there ? 

A. Mr, Eaton and Mr. Dakin commenced talking about this money matter 
again, and Mr. Dakin put on a kind of careless air- 

Mr. Holden.—Never mind, just state what he said. 



80 


A. He put on a careless air and said, “ If you don’t want to give me the 
money you can give it to Mr. Fellows.” 

Q. What did Mr. Eaton say in reply to that? 

A. I think he said then “ What will you do with it?” He says ‘‘I can see a 
man and talk with him and then I can send him to Fellows.” He says ‘‘All 
those fellows ike a good time, they like a cigar and like a glass of wine or 
something, and it is pretty hard to go around among people without having a 
little money.” 

Q. Did Mr. Eaton ask Mr. Dakin how he expected to use this money? 

A. Yes, I think he did. 

Q. What was the reply to that ? 

A. As I said before, he would send some of them to Fellows, and other he 
could see them in a social way, and he meant as if he would spend the money 
in sociability with them, and I think Eaton said, “ Who are these men you 
want to see?” and he commenced naming over, and he progressed so slowly 
that Eaton says, “ I have got a roll-call here,” or something to that effect, 
and pulled it out and laid it on the table, and Mr. Dakin took and looked it 
over, and they were on the other side of the table from where I sat. He 
looked it over, and he commenced naming over the roll-call, and Mr. Eaton 
suggested, “Just check those over that would be necessary to be seen.” Mr. 
Dakin I think said, “ There are some checks on here already.” And Eaton 
says, “ Well, check on the other side.” So he commenced, checked along; I 
don’t know how many checks he made; I didn’t see the roll-call only at a 
distance of two or three feet away, and Eaton says “Just put opposite those 
names the amounts necessary to see those men with.” 

Mr. Dodge—The witness mentions that Mr. Eaton took the roll call out of his 
vest pocket. Do you wish to be so understood ? 

A. I wish to be understood that Mr. Eaton gave Mr. Dakin a roll call. 

Mr. Dodge—From his vest pocket? 

A. From some pocket, I could not tell where it came from, I would not be 
positive. He took it from some pocket anyway. He made some motions to 
look for it. In the meantime, when they spoke about the roll call, I had one 
in my possession that I have had for some time. 

Q. I will ask you how you came by that roll call? 

A. I think it was from a suggestion of Mr. Little here. Mr. Little said we 
X)ugbt to get a roll call, and we got them through him from somebody here. 

Q. For what purpose did you obtain these roll calls? 

A. The purpose was suggested by Mr. Little that persons that we were ac- 
<^uainted with— 

Judge Van Zile—I object to it. I can hardly see the relevancy of going 
into this matter. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—I should like to state the reason why I asked the 
■question. It appears to us here that the whole line of their defense, so far 
as this is concerned, is to show that Mr. Eaton and Mr. Fellows procured these 
roll calls for a purpose, and that that purpose was to lead Mr. Dakin into diffi¬ 
culty. Now, we propose to show for what purpose they obtained these roll 
calls. 

Judge Van Zile—We disavow any such purpose. We understand that any¬ 
body can get a roll call, and that it is not a badge of fraud on the part of any 
man that he has got a roll call in his pocket. To go into this matter of what 
Mr. Little said about the roll call is entirely irrelevant. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—I understood this to be the line of defense marked 


81 


out by Brother Dodge, that he indicated in the cross-examination of Mr. 
Eaton. He was attempting to show, as I understood it, that he procured this 
roll call for a purpose. 

Judge Van Zile—There isn’t any idea of trying prove that he procured a 
roll call for a purpose. The idea is that he had a roll call, and used ic for a 
purpose. Not that he procured it for a purpose. Every body has a roll call; 
here is a roll call; there are roll calls all over this House. It is a mere assump¬ 
tion to say that we claim it was procured for a purpose. 

Q. For what purpose did you use the roll call ? 

Judge Van Zile—I can hardly see the relevancy of that. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—The gentleman says that it may be used for a pur¬ 
pose, indicating very strongly that perhaps this may have been used for a pur¬ 
pose. 

Judge Van Zile—I hardly think it is possible that my friend can misunder¬ 
stand me in that way. It was not that it could be used for a purpose, but only 
that Mr. Eaton had used it for a purpose. The House can tell what the facts 
are. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—I submit it is a proper question. 

The Speaker.—Ask the question. 

Witness—I used it if I met a member and talked with him ; I would judge 
from his views whether he was friendly towards the passage of the charter of 
Saginaw City or not. If he was I would check him and if he was against ns 
a bitter enemy, if he said that our measure could not be granted I would also 
make some memorandum, you know. I might talk with other friends here 
who would see and reason with him, so we could explain this matter more fully 
probably than he understood it. 

Q. Go on and state what was done with that roll call at that place? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—Which one? 

Mr. Goodrich—The one that Mr. Eaton had at that restaurant. 

A. After Mr. Eaton told him to set the amounts opposite those names that 
he had checked, Mr. Dakin used the pencil, made some marks or figures; I 
can’t tell what they were because I did not look over it. It was on the other 
side of the table. Apparently as he finished he passed the roll call or a paper 
very like that and stated ^‘There is one man who ought to have $26.00.” 

Q. Who said this? 

A. Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Who was that man? 

A. Mr. Rumsey. 

Q. A member of this Legislature? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did Mr. Eaton say in reply to it? 

A. I don’t know as he said anything. 

Q. What did you say, if anything ? 

A. I think I said “ What, Rumsey $25?” He said “ Yes, he will be a very 
valuable man if you can secure him for that.” 

Q. Was there anything further said by Mr. Dakin in relation to this particu¬ 
lar matter ? 

A. He and Eaton kept on talking some further I think, but I cannot place 
anything nor remember anything that took place of any importance after that. 
I think dinner was called at about that time. There are curtains that draw 
-together, and the man who keeps the house came in and drew them together, 

11 


82 


and we thought probably we had occupied the apartment long enough and got 
up and came out on the street and we parted on the corner there. 

Q. Do you remember of seeing the amounts set opposite those names upon 
the roll call ? 

A. No, sir, I never saw the roll call only at a distance. I could not tell the 
names that were checked. 

Q. Were they read over in your presence ? 

A. I think between Mr. Eaton and Mr. Dakin they looked them over. I 
did uot^ nor Mr. Fellows, pay much attention to it while they were doing that. 

Q. Was there any other or further conversation there at that restaurant be¬ 
tween you gentlemen in relation to this ma'-ter? 

A. Not that I remember. I think not. 

Q. What was the condition of Mr. Dakin at that time? 

A. In what way do you mean? 

Q. So far as being sober or under the influence of liquor or otherwise? 

A. He was sober. 

Q. You say you have been acquainted with Mr. Dakin for four or flve years 
last past. 

Q. Is he a man in the habit of becoming intoxicated? 

A. I never heard so and never saw him so. 

Q. Generally considered a sober man, is he? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many times did you see him drink upon the 19th of April? 

A. Twice. 

Q. What did he drink each time? 

A. Sour wine. Catawba they call it I think. 

Q. Did you meet Mr. Dakin at any other time during that day after his 
conversation at the restaurant ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where? 

A. In the evening, I think about five o’clock, I came up to the capitol and 
he and P. 0. Andrews, of Saginaw City, were talking there, and Dakin and 
Fellows and a man by the name of Tillotson, and I stopped a few moments, 
had not a great deal of time to spare to go back to the train, and I wanted to 
go home tbat evening. It was nothing more than good-bye or something like 
that. 

Q. You had no other conversation with him that day in relation to this 
charter matter or the procuring of money? 

A. No. 

Q. Did you state all that was said in relation to the mayor going up to Sagi¬ 
naw for money or that they expected money from the mayor? 

A. I don’t believe that I stated that. I think they said Shackleton had gone 
to Saginaw with Linton and they wanted him to telegraph some money, or he 
suggested he would or something like that. There was something said about 
money by telegraph. I don’t remember just how it was. 

(^. By whom? 

A. By Dakin and Fellows both, I think. 

Q. They stated that they expected money from the mayor, did they? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. By telegraph or otherwise? 

A. I think by telegraph. 

Q. For what purpose do I understand you? 


83 


Mr. Dodge—We object to the question as incompetent. 

The Speaker—If they stated the purpose he can testify. 

A. Before they spoke about the mayor going to Saginaw they stated that 
they ought to have some money to-day to work with the members, as Linton 
was away. 

Q. They stated they ought to have some money to-day to work among the 
members as Mr. Linton was away ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know why they wanted it on the 19th because Mr. Linton was 
away ? 

The Speaker.—Did they state the reason ? 

A. I could not say positively whether they did state the reason or not. 

Q. I will ask you if you do not know that Mr. Linton was somewhat in op¬ 
position to the bill before the Legislature, the charter ? 

A. Yes, I have been told so. 

Q. I will ask you whether you did or did not understand at that time that 
this was the reason why they wanted the money to use upon this particular 
occasion, because Linton was opposed to the amendment to the charter and 
was away ? 

Mr. Dodge.—We object to that. 

The Speaker—You need not answer that question. 

Q. I will ask you if you have any ill will or ill feeling toward Mr. Dakin, the 
respondent in this case? 

Mr. Dodge—We object to that. 

The Speaker—What is the objection? 

Mr. Dodge—It is not material whether he has any ill will or friendly feeling. 
We are not raising that question. It has not been raised. If we undertook to 
show that on the cross-examination we would have a right to do so, but this is 
not the proper proof on the direct examination with their own witness. 

Mr. Conductor Groodrich—I will ask the gentleman where he gets his knowl¬ 
edge from—why we have not the right to ask a question of that character? 

Mr. Dodge—I shall be pleased to inform the gentleman after we adjourn. 

Mr. Holden—Greenleaf on evidence. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—He has given evidence which this House has lis¬ 
tened to and it is for them to consider whether it is for or against the respon¬ 
dent. It is the duty of this House to know if possible whether this man has 
any ill-will or feeling towards the respondent, and if we can draw this out 
from the witness it is our duty to do so and it is our prerogative. It is our 
right to ask this witness the question if he has any such feeling. There is an 
inference drawn, and inasmuch as the line of defense ran in that direction 
yesterday in the examination of Mr. Eaton— 

Mr. Dodge—I object to the statement made by counsel. I think it entirely 
out of order. It is an argument addressed to the members of the House. It 
is not for the enlightenment of the Speaker to rule upon this question. It is 
one of those harangues for the benefit of the House. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—If it is offensive to the House, and if the members 
of this House are afraid to hear I hope they will stop their ears. I am ad¬ 
dressing this to the Speaker who is the one to decide, and when I ask a question 
of this kind and an objection has been made, I have the right to state why I 
ask the question, and the gentleman has the right to oppose it if he wishes. I 
say that the line of their defense ran in that direction yesterday. They were 
trying to draw from Mr. Eaton that he had animus, and that he was following 


84 


the respondent. And this will be the line of the defense all the way through, 
and we have the right to anticipate it, and I say that I know of no rule that 
prohibits the examining committee in relation to this matter to ask this witness 
the question upon direct examination whether he has any feeling in this matter 
or not. We are afraid—I openly and boldly make this assertion that we are 
afraid that the defense will not ask this gentleman this question. If we thought 
they would ask the witness this question, whether he had any animus or ill- 
feeling towards the respondent, we would not press this question any farther. 
But inasmuch as we fear that they will not ask the question we think we have 
the right to ask it on direct examination, and shall urge that it be answered. 

Mr. Van Zile—It occurs to me that that is rather a strange argument in the 
light of the authorities upon evidence that are so well written and so well un¬ 
derstood by lawyers. Now, what is the presumption ? The presumption is, if 
your honor please, that the witness sits there entirely impartial, to tell us the 
truth as it occurred. What is the oflBce of the cross-examination? The 
office of the cross-examination would be to sift him, and if there was anything 
that would contradict the presumption, to show it. Why, my friend might as 
well stand before this House, or before a court of justice and insist that he 
could ask the witness if his reputation in the neighborhood where he resided 
was good for truth and veracity, or that he might call witnesses to show that 
it was. And whoever heard of such a thing, that you could impeach or even 
sustain the character of your own witness ? 

It might be possible that it would run through the mind of my friend that 
possibly the defense would not undertake to impeach the witness, and he might 
be anxious that the House should understand that the witness is a man of good 
character and reputation in the community for truth and veracity. Why, such 
a thing as that it seems to me runs counter to all the authorities upon the law 
of evidence. That is entirely a matter of cross-examination. Everybody is 
presumed to know—it is a presumption that the law lays down—that that man 
sits there an impartial witness. Nothing in the line that my friend speaks of 
should frighten him, that this side would not ask this witness that question. 
Why, we need not ask it or we may ask it. It does not make a particle of 
difference. If we do not ask it the presumption is that he is impartial unless 
there is something in his testimony that has proven that he was not. I never 
yet heard—of course my experience is not so broad perhaps as that of my 
friend—but I never yet heard of such a question as that being asked and sus¬ 
tained in a court of justice. “Have you any ill-feeling?” Why, it is slapping 
the law in the face. It is running counter to the very theory and idea of the 
law of evidence. 

The Speaker—The objection is sustained. The chair will ask this question, 
which has been handed up: Was there any promise of money made by you or 
Mr. Eaton to either Mr. Dakin or Mr. Fellows at the time of the meeting 
in he saloon or at any time prior, to your knowledge, by any other person? 

Q. No. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin say or intimate that he could buy Mr. Ramsey’s vote or 
influence for $25 ? 

Mr. Holden—I object to that part of the question in which he is asked for 
an intimation. That is askng for the conclusion of the witness. The question 
is proper if it asks what was said upon the subject, to allow this House to judge 
of what was meant by it. The members of this House are here to weigh the 
vote, to get their inferences and not the witness’. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—What was the question ? 


85 


The oflBcial stenographer read the question as follows: “Q. Did Mr. Dakin 
say or intimate that he could buy Mr. Kumsey’s vote or influence for $25.’’ 

The Speaker—The chair is of the opinion that the objection is well taken, to 
that part of the question. The question was sent to the chair by one of the 
members of the House. Mr. Crowley may answer whether Mr. Dakin did say 
that he could buy Mr. Rumsey’s vote or influence. 

Mr. Van Zile—If he used that language there is no objection to it. 

A. No, he did net. 

Q. You say that Mr. Dakin did not say that he could buy Mr. Rumsey’s 
vote or influence for $25? 

A. No. 

The Speaker read the following: 

Q. Then what reason did Mr. Dakin give for putting that amount opposite 
to Mr. Rumsey’s name, it being larger than the other amounts. 

A. I thought I stated that. As he finished up making those figures and 
passed the roll-call over like that (illustrating), I don’t know whether the 
figures “ 25” were there or not, but he made the remark “ There is a man that 
ought to have $25.” I said “ Who is that ?” He said “Mr. Rumsey.” 

The Speaker—Did he assign any reason? 

A. No. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—Was there any other conversation that you 
remember of that was had upon that occasion between Mr. Eaton and Mr. 
Dakin in your presence in relation to this matter, that you have not stated? 

A. Not that I remember of now. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—That is all. Take the witness. 

The Speaker read the following: 

Have you at any time during the present session of the Legislature heard the 
name of any member of the House mentioned by Mr. Dakin, or in his presence, 
in regard to the use of money in connection with any matter of legislation 
pending in this House other than as stated in connection with the fifteen mem¬ 
bers already specified? 

A. No. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. HOLDEN. 

Q. This occasion of your coming to Lansing was the fourth of the kind, was 
it? 

A. The fourth time. 

Mr. Manly—I would like to ask a question in connection with the one I sent 
up a moment ago, if I have time to write it down. 

The Speaker—Send it up and it will be asked afterwards. 

Mr. Holden—I will suspend. 

Mr. Manly—I wish to add to that question, “or any one of the fifteen 
marked on that paper?” 

The Speaker—Let the question be read. 

The official stenographer read the question as amended, as follows: 

Q. Have you at any time during the present session of the Legislature heard 
the name of any member of the House mentioned by Mr. Dakin, or in his 
presence, in regard to the use of money in connection with any matter of Legis¬ 
lation pending in this House other than as stated in connection with the fifteen 
members already specified, or any one of the fifteen marked on that paper? 

A. Not up to that time. 

Mr. Holden—I will resume my cross-examination. 


86 


Q. You were at that time the Recorder of the city of Saginaw, were you? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You had recently been elected 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I do not suppose for one moment that you came here with any evil inten¬ 
tion upon the Legislature did you? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And you did not suppose that any one with whom you were associating 
had any evil intention, did you ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you not claim to have manhood enough within you had you believed 
that a crime of that kind—that is, attempted bribery—was intended, to have 
rebuked it then and there 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You would have rebuked it ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. If you had understood that any bribery was intended ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And would you not, if you had supposed at that time that anybody was 
trying to make you a party to it have rebuked it instantly? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And most effectively 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now as I understand it is a fact that you did not rebuke Mr. Dakin’s 
course at that time 
A. No, sir. 

Q. It was then because you did not believe that he intended any harm, was 
it not 

A. Yes, sir; I did not believe he intended any harm. 

Q. Nor I. Now when you first came here on that morning you met Mr. 
Dakin and Mr. Fellows 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where? 

A. At the city National Bank corner down here. 

Q. Where did you go then 

A. We went into Oottington & Davis’, into the Windsor restaurant. 

Q. The saloon part? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I suppose being Saginaw friends meeting that you took a drink? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is proper for Saginawians. Then you had a talk with them in regard 
to matters? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And soon after met Mr. Eaton? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And Mr. Eaton suggested the propriety of going in somewhere and sit¬ 
ting down? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And they went in and another drink was had? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There was no one present but these four ? 

A. No, sir. 


87 


Q. And there was no itnpressioa or inference formed in your mind that 
Dakin intended to bribe any one at all, was there? 

A. I could not say there was; no, sir. 

Q. If there had been you would have rebuked it, would you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You would have put a stop to it? 

A. I would. 

Q. In your hotel at Saginaw, I suppose, of course, you keep a bar? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And in your acquaintance with Mr. Dakin has he at times been at 
jour hotel—dropped in casually? 

A. I don’t remember ever seeing him in my house. 

Q. Did you ever see him take a drink of anything that was stimulating 
until here in Lansing? 

A. Well, he has drank with me once or twice "before, but what he drank I 
could nut tell. It was home, in Saginaw. 

Q. Wasn’t it some light drink, like pop? 

A. I could not tell what he drank. I think I remember the place where it 
was, but I don’t remember what he drank. 

Q. In any event, he was not regarded as a drinking man? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Nor a bad citizen in any way? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. He was regarded as an honest man, wasn’t he? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Entirely so ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You never heard anything against his character until this matter came 
up? 

A. Not until this matter in the Legislature. 

Q. You have been an alderman of the city? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you this last year? 

A. No, sir. 

Q Were you one of the committee selected to come down here in the inter¬ 
est of the Saginaw City charter? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know that two charters were presented? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is it not a fact that some feeling on the part of the members of the com¬ 
mittee—I do not include yourself, I exclude you from this question—arose in 
regard to Mr. Dakin’s course in the matter? 

A. I don’t know as I ever heard it expressed. 

Q. Don’t you know that some members of the committee were offended be¬ 
cause he had not aided them in their particular charter as they thought he 
ought? 

A. There was some talk pro and con. It was not directly at Mr. Dakin, you 
couldn’t tell who it was. They would say it is too bad we have got in this 
muddle, it is too bad this man has took this way to represent us, or something 
like this, we would be better without nobody, or something to that effect. 

Q. Was Eaton present at those conversations? 

A. I could not say whether he was or not. 


88 


Q. How many Saginawians were here in the interest of the Saginaw City 
charter on the 19th of this month? Name them. 

A. I believe on that day there was Jay Smith, Eaton and myself came down 
together. We met certain Saginaw men here when he came. 

A. Levi Tillotson. 

Q. An ex-alderman? 

A. Yes, sir. P. C. Andre came down. 

Q. He is an ex-mayor ? 

A, Yes, sir. 

Q. Ool. Little? 

A. Col. Little was here. 

Q. And ex-alderman Fellows? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you call to mind any others ? 

A. No. 

Q. D. 0. Dickson ? 

A. D. 0. Dickson came in that evening about eleven o’clock from Chicago, 
Q. Is he ex-controllei of the city ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And was a member of the committee on charter amendments ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And helped to prepare one of the charters ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is nine people altogether, as a matter of fact those gentlemen are 
all men of sociability, aren’t they ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Of social habits ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. They are the average Saginawian ? 

A. Some of them is. 

Q. And it is not unusual for those men when they go away anywhere and 
meet with friends, to spend their money very freely? 

A. It is unusual for some of those you have mentioned. 

Q. But for the most part? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Some of them ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Some of them would think nothing of spending ten or fifteen or twenty 
dollars a day in a social way with friends outside of town? 

A. No. 

Q. It is a way they have.^ 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And they mean no harm by it? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. If I understand you right, you did not suppose, from all that occurred 
there with Eaton, and Dakin, and Fellows, and yourself, that any of these men 
intended to use that money in any other way than in sociability, did you? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to that. Let the witness state the facts 
and then this House can judge what the intention was. He asks him to state 
what he supposes, which is clearly incompetent. 

Mr. Holden—Under the rules of evidence governing cross-examinations it is 


89 


clearly admissable. Every lawyer upon this floor knows it. There is no ques¬ 
tion about it. It is fundamental in its nature. This is cross-examination, 
and has a bearing upon the motive of this witness, which I believe to be pure, 
and I believe that Mr. Dakin’s motives were pure. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—All I have to say in relation to that is that the 
gentleman has a queer notion of purity. He says that every lawyer knows that 
it is competent because it is cross examination. He asks this witness what he 
supposes were the intentions of Mr. Dakin and Mr. Fellows. I submit that the 
proposition only needs to be stated to show the ridiculousness of it. Should 
not this witness give to this House the facts and let them judge whether Mr. 
Dakin intended anything wrong or not? 

The Speaker—The witness must confine himself to the facts and not to 
suppositions. 

To which ruling of the Speaker counsel for the respondent did then and 
there except. 

Q. There was nothing in the facts that indicated to your mind that the 
money was to be used in any other than a social way ? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to that. It is the same question put in 
different words. 

Q. Was there anything said that it should be used in any other than a social 
way ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who said it, and what did he say ? All I want are the facts. 

A. As I said before, “ You can give Fellows the money and I will see my 
man and send him to Fellows,” that was stated. Now, what he meant you can 
take from that; you have got it just about as I got it. 

Q. You have before stated that had you supposed it meant any corruption 
you would have rebuked it. That is true? 

A. Certainly I would. 

Q. Now, the substance of the conversation concerning Mayor Shackleton 
was this: That he and Representative Linton, who is the member from East 
Saginaw, had gone back home for the purpose of agreeing upon a compromise of 
hostilities, as it were, between the two charters? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And that was stated to be their purpose in returning home? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you see Mr. Fellows produce a memorandum of their proposed agree¬ 
ment? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Holden—Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to ask if Mr. Fellows is in 
the room, and if he has the memorandum to produce it? 

(A paper was here brought to the counsel.) 

Q. (Showing witness the paper.) Is that the memorandum? 

A. I think that is the document. 

Mr. Holden—I offer the document in evidence. It becomes a part of the 
conversation, and tends to throw light upon other parts of the conversation. I 
never have seen it until this moment. 

EXAMINATION BY MR. CONDUCTOR GOODRICH. 

Q. Did you read that ? 

A. I read the first three lines at that time and I handed it back, I says, 
‘‘ We are better without Florence than with those conditions.” 

13 


90 


Q. You did not read it through ? 

A. No. 

Q. You do not know whether this is the same document or not ? 

A. The heading is the same and I remember the hand-writing. 

Q. There is an interlineation there ? 

A. That was done there in pencil when I looked at it. 

Q. Did you read it clear through ? 

A. I did not. 

By Mr. Conductor Herrington: We object to it as incompetent, because the 
witness states that he did not read it clear through, and therefore he cannot 
positively identify it, and also because it is not signed by any person. And I 
would like to ask the witness a question— 

Q. Can you identify that positively as the paper ? 

A. Well, the writing is the same, it was on the same heading as near as I 
oan remember, and I remember these letters here, the way they are made. It 
has been either copied by the same man as near as could be, or it is the same 
identical paper. 

Q. How much of the original did you read? 

A. I should say about two lines of it, until I seen where it run. I seen 
what the idea was and I just handed it back. 

Mr. Holden—In your judgment it is the same paper? 

A. [ would think it was the same paper, or an identical copy of the same 
paper, and written upon the same kind of paper and by the same man. I 
don’t see any change in it. 

EXAMINATION BY MR. CONDUCTOR GOODRICH. 

Q. It was not signed at that time by any person ? 

A. No. 

Q. It is not signed now ? 

A. No. 

Q. Then it was no agreement, was it? 

A. It was about what they were talking of entering into. It was no agree¬ 
ment, of course. 

Q. No one had agreed to sign that? 

A. No, not as I understand. 

Q. You never heard any one say that they were going to sign it? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And you do not know whether their minds met upon that paper? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—In whose hand-writing is it? 

A I could not tell you. 

Examination by Mr. Holden: 

Q. This has the same general appearance of that paper? 

A Yes, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Fellows say that this was a memorandum of the proposed agree¬ 
ment which had carried Mayor Shackleton and Representative Linton to 
Saginaw? 

A. He says something like this, that they have gone to see with regard to 
Florence. 

Q. And produced this? 

A. Took that out of his pocket and I just looked at it and seen where it run 
and says, “We are better without Florence than to agree to this.” 


91 


The Speaker—The paper is admitted in evidence. 

The paper was here marked by the clerk “ Exhibit 0,’^ and read, and is as 
follows: 

Laksing, April 18, 1887. 

We agree to refund to Oarelton township the amount of money they have 
paid to build the Genesee street road, to extend a water main to the lower end 
of said strip of Florence, to give said strip of Florence three electric lights 
and proper police protection, and to expend all the moneys received in the city 
treasury from said territory for the next eight years on said piece of territory. 

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATIOil. 

By Mr. Conductor Goodrich. 

Q. You stated that you did not, at that time that they were talking at the 
restaurant about moifey being used, that you did not think that there was any 
bribery going on at all? 

Q. No, sir. 

Q. I will ask you what you thought was going to be done with this $25 that 
was to be obtained? 

Mr. Holden—I interpose the objection that they themselves made right on 
that point, and the Speaker ruled that the witness should state what was said 
and not what he thought. I believe the Speaker was right, even though he 
ruled against me. I ask that the ruling be continued, because I believe it is 
right. 

The Speaker—Anything that was said between the parties is competent. 
What Mr. Crowley might have thought was going to be done with it is irrele¬ 
vant. 

Q. I ask you how much that list figured up, if you understand. 

Mr. Holden—I object. The list is the best evidence, and the witness said he 
did not have it in his hand or see it only at a distance. 

The Speaker—Did you hear Mr. Dakin state what the amount footed up? 

A. No; I could not say that I did. The only distinct amount that I can 
remember was stated as the figures were finished and the roll call passed away, 
that one man ought to have $25, and I asked the question myself who it was, 
and he said Mr. Rumsey. I said, “ What, Mr. Rumsey ?” He replied, ‘‘Yes, 
a very valuable man if you get him for that,” and that ended it. We left 
our seats and got out of the room. , 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin say at that time that $25 could be used or not, with Mr. 
Rumsey? 

Mr. Holden—I object to that as leading. 

Q. What did he say in relation to $25 to be used with Rumsey? 

Mr. Holden—I object to that as having been gone over six times, of which I 
have the distinct honor four times myself. 

Mr. Goodrich.—I did not keep count, although I hardly think it was six. I 
hardly think that that very question was asked. 

The Speaker.—Ask the question. 

A. He said Rumsey ought to have $25. 

Q. For what? 

A. We were just about arising from our seats and came out of the room at 
that time. 

Q. What did you understand before ? 

Mr. Holden.—0, don’t commit the error I made the second time. 


92 


Mr. Conductor Goodrich.—Did you commit an error ? 

Mr. Holden.—The chair so rule;1. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich.—I ask for a ruling on that. 

Mr. Speaker.—The objection is sustained. 

Q. We would like to know what you mean when you say that you did nob 
understand that there was any bribery connected with this, when you say that 
Mr. Dakin though Mr. Rumsey ought to have $25. 

Mr. Holden.—I object to that. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich.—What do you mean by that ? 

Mr. Holden. The testimony of the witness is the best evidence of his own 
meaning. It was clearly, concisely and fairly given in such a manner as capa¬ 
ble of being comprehended by every man, woman and child upon this floor. 
It is not ambiguous. 

Mr. Conductor Goodrich—I would say that it is somewlvifc ambiguous to me, 
I understand this, that Mr. Crowley is our witness, and ^e believe him to be 
honest, and we believe that he desires to tell the truth just as he understands it. 
We believe him to be a candid, upright man, and will tell the truth just as he 
understands it, but I say this is ambiguous to me, and it must be to the mem¬ 
bers of this Legislature. The witness states that he did so understand that 
there was bribery going on. He did not understand, although this list was 
made out and a valuation fixed to these fifteen different members of the H( use, 
although a price was fixed upon each one,, he did not understand that there was 
any bribery going on. I want to know what he means when he says he did not 
understand that there was any bribery going, on, or that Mr. Dakin did not 
intend to approach these members when he fixed a value in dollars and centa 
to the names of these men. I want to know what the witness means by that. 

The witness—I would be glad to tell you if I were permitted to do so. 

Mr. Holden—I withdraw the objection if it is a question of privilege. 

The Speaker—Answer the question. 

A. I thought like this, the amount set down opposite those men’s, footing it 
all together, if that money was raised it would be for the benefit of Mr. Dakin 
and Mr. Fellows, and these members would never hear of it, that was my 
opinion. 

Mr. Holden—You honor has ruled that that may be admitted, that the wit¬ 
ness may give his opinion upon that matter. I wish to ask one question. 

Q. Nobody said that, did they? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You have always had a good opinion of Dakin’s honesty? 

A. I had, but he wanted that money on that day. 

Q. Did he ask you to give him some? 

A. No. 

Q. Did he ask Eaton to give him some? 

A. No, I could not say. 

Q. You heard Eaton swear yesterday that he did not? 

A. I did not hear all of 'Mr. Eaton’s testimony yesterday, I was not in the 
room. 

Q. Do you remember hearing him testify upon that point, that Dakin did 
not ask him for any money that day? 

A. I did. 

Q. You heard Eaton so testify? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. 8o far as you know that is absolutely true, is it ? 


93 


A. That is the absolute truth. 

The following question was sent to the Speaker’s desk and read : 

Q. Was there anything said during this interview at the restaurant as to 
what purpose the $25 placed opposite Mr. Rutusey’s natiie was to be used for? 

A. No. 

The witness then leaves the stand but returns and makes the following cor¬ 
rection : 

I wish to make a correction. It just came to my mind through Mr. Little. 
Mr. Holden asked me if Mr. Dixon was not here on the 19th. As I come to 
remember it was not the 19th that he came here, it was the time before that 
that I was down that he met us here. It was not on the night of the 19th that 
he came here. 

Levi Tillotson, being duly sworn, testihed as follows: 

Examined by Mr. Conductor Snow: 

Q. Where do you reside? 

A. Saginaw. 

Q. How long have you lesided in Saginaw? 

A. About eight years. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Milo H. Dakin? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q And Giles Fellows? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where were you ou the 19ch day of the present month about two o’clock 
in the afternoon? 

A. I was in Lansing. 

Q. Do you remember of meeting Mr. Dakin or Mr. Fellows about that, time? 

A. I do, sir. 

Q. Where did you meet them? 

A. I met them right here on the corner, on the street the Hudson House is , 
on. 

Q. Do you remember of having a conversation with Mr. Dakin and Mr. Pel- 
lows upon that occasion? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State what that conversation was. 

A. 1 met Mr. Fellows and Mr. Dakin, and after the usual greeting I asked 
them how matters stood in regard to our charter. They said they thought 
things looked very favorable, and that they needed some money to carry it 
through. # 

Mr. Holden—I want to know which one said that. 

A. Mr. Fellows. 

Mr. Holden—I object. 

Q. Was Mr. Dakin present? 

A Yes, sir. 

Q. Proceed. 

Q. Mr. Fellows spoke and said that they would have to have some money in 
order to get the matter through, and that Mr. Shackleton had not brought 
any money down to amount to anything. I think he spoke and said about 
ten dollars, and after a while he said that Mr. Shackeltou gave him five dol¬ 
lars, and iVlr. Dakin two. Then Mr. Dakin told me that he had given Mr. 
Eaton a certain statement or list of names; thiat it would take money to use 
to get that charter through. I said to him, “ Mr. Dakin, in the name of God 
you didn’t do that.” He says, “ I did.” I said, “ You had better go and have 


94 


it straightened at once, for you will get into troubleand I advised hiui ta 
go and see Mr. Eaton and put a stop to it. 

Q. Do you remember whether Mr. Dakin said how much money was neces¬ 
sary to use among the certain member that he made a list of? 

A. I think he said from five to twenty-five dollars. 

Q. Apiece? 

A. Yes sir. 

Q. Did he say to you in what manner he intended to use this money? 

A. Ivo, sir, I don’t think he did, any further than in a social time. 

Q. Do you remember of making any statement to them, or saying to them, 
or asking them if they were not doing wrong in undertaking to use money in 
this way? 

A. When Mr. Dakin made the statement that he gave a list, I told him 
that it was wrong and asked him why he did it. 

Q. What was his reply? 

A. He said he knew it was not right. 

Q. Was there anything further said during that conversation in regard to this 
matter? 

A. I think that was the sum and substance of it. There might have been 
some talk besides, but nothing that I remernbei' now. 

Q. Did you meet Mr. Dakin that day at any other place ? 

A. I think I did see him two or three different times, twice that I recollect, 

Q. Did you have have any conversation with him ? 

A. I don’t remember talking to him about this matter after that. There 
might have been some words, something said. 

CROSS EXAMINATION' BY MR. HOLDEN. 

Q. This was on the street, was it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You being a gentleman from our town of Saginaw, was anything said 
about taking anything in a social way, drinks or cigars ? 

A. At that time? 

Q. Yes. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Upon whose invitation ? 

A. Upon mine. 

Q. Was it accepted or declined on Dakm’s part ? 

A. It was declined on Dakin’s part. 

Q. And you told Dakin, as I understand you, when he said that he had given 
a list, or marked roll call to Mr. Eaton, “ In the name of G-od, Dakin, why did 
you do that; Eaton wdl get you into trouble with it, I am afraid?” 

A. No, sir, I told him he would get into trouble. I don’t remember saying, 
Eaton would get him into trouble. 

Q. Y'ou advised him to get the paper back ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q And you told him that you would try and get it back, didn’t you ? 

A. I told him I would go with him or help him if I could. I did not tell 
him I would try and get it back. 

Q. Did you not tell him that Eaton was not a friend of his ? 

A. No, sir, I don’t think I did. 

Q. Do you know whether, as a matter of fact, he was a friend ? 

A. That, I could not say. 


95 


Q. Never knew that he was a friend ? 

A. That he was or was not. 

Q. Mr. Fellows was a member of the city committee sent here by the city 
authorities to aid in getting the charter through the Legislature, was he not? 
A. I understand so. I do not know it to be so, but I understand so. 

Q. And it is a fact, is it not, that either the city of Saginaw or prominent 
business men were to reimburse this committee sent down in the interest of 
the city for their expenses ? 

A. I so understand, I do not know that to be so. 

Q. But that was your understanding of the matter ? ^ 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You are an alderman of the city? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you last year ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And are yet? 

A. And am yet. 

Q. Your term of office expires when? 

A. Next spring. ^ 

Q. You were not up for re-election this last spring? 

A. No, sir. The reason that I do not know is that I was.away from home 
for two months; went away the seventh of February and did not get back un¬ 
til the first of the month. 

Q. On a trip to California? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And that is all you know about the matter? 

A. That is all I know about it. 

The following question was submitted by a member and read by the Speaker: 
What reply did Oakin make when you advised him to see Eaton and fix the 
matter up? 

A. I don’t know that he made any reply. He asked me to see him. 

Q. He asked you to see Eaton ? 

A. He said that he had done wrong and he asked me to see Eaton. 

Q. Did you see Eaton in regard to it? 

A. I saw him after I left Dakin; saw Eaton just this side of the Hudson 
House. 

Q And told him to give up the matter? 

A. No, sir, I did not say anything about it at that time, any further than 
when he told me what Dakin had done, I told him Dakin had told me substan¬ 
tially the same thing. 

Q. And what did you say to Eaton then? 

A. 1 don’t think I said anything to him just at that time. 

Q. Afterward, pertaining to that particular subject, what did you say? 

A. I asked if he he could not give up this— 

Mr. Conductor Snow—That is objected to as incompetent. 

Mr. Holden—It is competent as showing the motive of the complaining 
witness and as contradicting him also, wherein Mr. Eaton stated to this House 
that Mr. Tiilotson had not asked him anything upon the subject. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—There is no such answer in the record. 

The Speaker—What did Mr. Eaton say? 

A. When I asked Mr. Eaton if this matter could not be fixed up he said he 


96 


did not know, he did not think he would dare do it now; I think that was 
about what Eaton said. 

Q. Did you ask him for the list? 

A. No, sir, I did not ask him for the list. 

Q. When you spoke about fixing up the matter? 

A. I asked him if it would not be better to give back this list. He said he 
did not know that he dared. 

Q. When was that? 

A. I believe that wa^ on the 20th. 

Q. yi/^hat time? 

A. I am not positive whether in the forenoon or afternoon. I think it was 
down near the Hudson House. 

Q. Let me strengthen your recollection if I can. Was it not at the Hudson 
House and early in the morning, the first time you met him that morning? 

A. No, sir; I think it was on the street. 

Q. But in front of the Hudson House? 

A. No, sir, my recollection is that it was this side of the Hudson House, on 
this side of the street. I would not be positive as to where the conversation 
took place. ^ 

Q. Don’t you remember that it was in the morning? 

A. No, sir, it rains in my mind that it was toward noon or perhaps a little 
after noon. 

Q. But you are not positive as to the time? 

A. Not as to the time. 

The following question was sent to the Speaker’s desk by a member and read , 
by the Speaker: 

Q, What did Eaton say to you, if anything, about having Dakin in his 
power on account of the slip? 

A. He did not say anything to me in regard to that. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—This was on the 20th, was it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Holden—You have, until this matter came up, always regarded the rep¬ 
utation of Milo H. Dakin as that of an honest man, have you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Never heard ought to the contrary, have you? 

A. No, sir, I can’t say that I have. 

The following question, sent to the Speaker’s desk by Mr. Manly, was read 
by the Speaker: 

Have you at any time during the present session of the Legislature heard the 
name of any member of the House mentioned by Mr. Dakin, or in his 
presence in regard to the use of money in connection with any matter of legis¬ 
lation pending in this House, other than as stated in connection with the 
fifteen members already specified, or any of the fifteen? 

A. I have not. 

Mr. Bates moved to amend rule 3, of the Rules of Order, by inserting in 
line 6 after the word “desk” the words “at the rear of the aisle.” Also in 
line 7 after the word “desk” the words “at the rear of the aisle;” rule 3 as 
amended to read as follows: 

1 Rule 3.—At the opening of the investigation the Speaker shall direct 

2 the Sergeant-at-Arms to call the accused in the following manner: ‘* Milo 

3 H. Dakin, appear and answer to the charges filed against you by the com- 

4 mittee of the House of Representatives of the State of Michigan on behalf 



97 


5 of said House.” If said accused or his counsel shall appear thev shall be- 

6 assigned seats in front of the Clerk’s desk at the rear of the afsle. The 

7 said committee shall also be assigned seats in front of the Clerk’s desk at 

8 the rear of the aisle. The Clerk of the House shall then read the charges 

9 preferred, and the accused may file answer thereto, and read the same. 

10 If the answer raises a question of jurisdiction the accused shall be allowed 

11 thirty minutes to argue the same, and the committee a like time to answer. 
Mr. S. Baker moved to amend the amendment by striking out the word 

“ rear,” where it occurs in lines 6 and 7, and inserting the word “ center” in 
lieu thereof, 

Which was accepted 

The motion to amend then prevaded, two-thirds of all the members elect 
voting therefor. 

The hour of 13 M. having arrived, the Speaker declared the House at recess 
until 2 o’clock P. M. 


AFTERNOON SESSION. 

2 o’clock P. M. 

The House met and was called to order by the Speaker. 

Roll called: quorum present. 

The House resumed the investigation of the charges against Representative 
Dakin. 

Mr. Hosford moved that rule 13 of the rules of order be amended by striking 
out the word “daily” after word ‘‘ published,” and add at the end of the rule 
the words “as soon as may be,” so that the rule as amended shall read as 
follows: 

“The stenographers employed shall take the constitutional oath of office and 
shall take full minutes of all the proceedings, which shall be published in the 
Journal as soon as may be.” 

Which, after discussion by the members of the House, was withdrawn. 

Jay Smith, recalled. 

The following question, handed up by a member of the House, was put to 
the witness by the Speaker: 

Q. Have you at any time during the present session of the Legislature heard 
the name of any member of the House mentioned by Mr. Dakin, or in his 
presence, in regard to the use of money in connection with any matter of 
legislation pending in this House other than as stated in connection with the 
fifteeen members already specified ? 

A. I have not. 

Mr. Conductor Chapman—Mr. Speaker, the committee rest their case. 

The Speaker—Under the rule the defense will now be allowed fifteen minutes 
in which to open their case. 

Mr. Holden—Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House: 

We had not expected to be called upon to open our case at this time, but we 
had expected that when the time should arrive we would be very brief in the 
matter, as we wish to consume no more of the time of this House than is abso¬ 
lutely necessary to a full and fair understanding. 

The defense in this case may well be apprehended from what has already 
occurred. The statement of the defendant has been taken in part. Of course, 
14 



98 


from the manner in which it was taken, that is, in response to questions and 
‘written in a narrative form, it must be less complete, less in detail than it will 
appear upon the stand from the witnesses that we shall produce; and the only 
object that we have at this time is to state to you briefly that it is in the same 
general line of the evidence which has already been produced. 

Our witnesses will be few and we expect that the members of this honorable 
body, when they have heard all the evidence that the prosecution and the de¬ 
fense may see fit to produce for their consideration, will believe that this de¬ 
fendant is more sinned against than sinning; that while he is perhaps de¬ 
serving of rebuke and censure from this House for his stupid course in the 
matter, if I may be allowed the expression, he is still entitled to sympathy for 
the manner in which he Wcis taken advantage of by a man less honevst and 
more designing than he himself. We shall insist in this matter that one of the 
main characteristics of an honest man is to believe that others are honest. If 
you have ever dealt with Quakers, the most honest people on earth, you find 
them most readily gulled. 

We shall ask you to believe from the evidence in this case which is already in, 
and that which is to come, that the respondent is the victim of a design. Had 
he been the rascal that some have asked you to believe, he would have had that 
shrewdness to have suspected that a vile conspiracy was in progress to entrap 
and ruin him. We shall ask you to believe from the evidence that the one who 
was so careful of his own reputation—that when he became so startled and 
frightened at his own situation in the matter—that it was a sham on his part; 
that if startled at all it was with the opportunity which he found he had to get 
even with three men, and he was willing to disgrace the fair name of members 
of this House, to insult the dignity of the House, for the purpose of accom¬ 
plishing his object of getting even. 

We shall expect you to believe from the evidence in the matter that being 
angry at Milo H. Dakin because he led, as Mr. Eaton believed, the council of 
the city of Saginaw to reject his nomination for re-election as city attorney, 
and at Giles Fellows, who was an alderman and voted against the confirmation, 
and the mayor of Saginaw, I say for this reason he was willing to disgrace the 
members of this House and bring reproach upon the reputation of Saginaw, 
which he yesterday said he was so careful to maintain at home and abroad. 
But forFredric L. Eaton’s course in this matter of coming to Milo H. Dakin, 
heretofore an honored and respected member of this body, and urging him to 
put down the marks opposite the names of certain members upon this 
fioor, and then to put down the figures, to gratify his own spite; but for 
his action in the matter nothing of the kind would ever have been done. 
More sinned against than sinning; honest simplicity upon the one side and 
designing cunning npon the other. Milo H. Dakin would never have disgraced 
this House. It was Frederic L. Eaton that did it; did it designedly while Dakin 
did not design. We shall ask you to believe from the evidence that Milo H. 
Dakin has never approached a member of this House and sought in any way to 
induce him to violate his oath of oflSce in any sense. We shall ask you to believe 
from the evidence in this case that what talk there was came up in a natural 
way. 

It already appears in part that it was understood by the Common Council of 
the city of Saginaw, and leading persons there that the lobby members who 
should come in the interest of the city should have their expenses defrayed by 
the city and persons there; that it was talked to him that the best way to 
enable them to act in the matter was first to form the acquaintance of mem- 




99 


hereof this House; that if they came here into this hall during the progress 
of the business of the House, being strangers for the most part, they could get 
but little real attention, though of course civility and respect from every mem¬ 
ber; but being busy they could give the matter but little consideration, and 
that if in a social vray the lobby members from Saginaw could meet the gen¬ 
tlemen of this Honse-in their leisure moments, they could form their acquaint¬ 
ance. 

And we know full well that we can present a matter better to a friend and ac¬ 
quaintance than to a stranger; that he takes more interest in a matter to look 
it up and see if there are merits or demerits in the measure. And Milo H. Ddkin 
was simply led to believe that a social gathering in that way—not for the purpose 
of corrupting members in the least—might be had by way of courtesy to 
his friends and constituents, as other entertainments in a social way might be 
had, without the slightest intention of doing any wrong. In fact, there was 
no wrong in it as Milo H. Dakin was led to believe; but bad use ot his confidence 
in this matter was designed to be made by Eaton unbeknown to Dakin. 

Eaton knew the purposes for which he intended this interview. Dakin did 
not. We shall show you, in addition to what Eaton has said, more fully how 
Eaton urged that he designate particular members. For, Eaton being a 
lawyer, he knew as a legal proposition that if Dakin should make a general 
statement it would not be of the force that it would be to make a particular 
designation. And Isay that the evidence will appear more fully in regard to 
the manner in which Eaton urged, and by his urging almost forced Dakin to 
make the designations which he did. Eaton has owned it in part but the 
truth has not yet all afipeared. 

This will be the general nature of the evidence to be produced. We have 
but one witness to call, I may say, gentlemen, aside from the ones subpoenaed 
on the part of the committee of the House. We supposed that they would be 
put on the stand, but inasmuch as the committee, for reasons satisfactory to 
themselves, have not seen fit to put them upon the stand, and as we suppose 
they know something concerning this matter, we shall put them on, and what¬ 
ever there is in the matter, Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House, we want 
to appear. There is nothing that we shall keep back. We wish you knew it 
all, and will do what we honestly can to aid you to that end, and if we are able 
to give you an understanding of the whole of it, you will not expel this member. 

By Mr. Conductor Diekerna—I should like to know what the gentleman 
refers to when he says that we have not put upon the stand all of the witnesses 
subpoenaed by us. 

Mr. Holden—Is it not true ? 

Mr. Conductor Diekerna—It is not true. 

Mr. Holden—Then I beg pardon of the gentleman. I was told by a number 
that they had been subpoenaed and expected to be put upon the stand on oehalf 
of the committee. If I have been misled then perhaps I have been a victim 
also. 

TESTIxMONY OF GILES FELLOWS. 

Giles Fellows being duly sworn testified as follows: 

Examined by Mr. Dodge. 

Q. Where do you reside ? 

A. Saginaw City. 

Q. How long have you lived there ? 

A. About 21 or 22 years. 


100 


Q. How do you happen to be here in Lansing at this time ? Was any sub¬ 
poena served upon you ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Since you came here in pursuance of the command of the subpoena, 
where have you appeared with regard to this cause; have you appeared before 
a,ny committee? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What committee was that? 

A. It was this investigating committee, as I suppose. 

Q. How did you happen to be before this investigating committee? 

A. I was subpoenaed and notified to be there at such a time. 

Q. Who notified you to appear before the investigating committee? 

A, There was a gentleman came down and asked me to come up; I appeared 
here in the House and he came to me and wanted I should go up in the room. 
Q. Was it one of the officers of this House ? 

A. Yes, sir, the man at the door. 

Q. The deputy Sergeant-at-arms? 

A. Yes, sir; the gentleman that is at the door now. 

Q. And you appeared before the committee, and what did you do there? 

A. I made a statement. 

Q. Who was present on the committee ? 

A. There is none of them that I could recall their names only Mr. Snow. 
The others I was introduced to at the time. 

Q. Were the other members of the committee that now appear here then 
present ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. They interrogated you there, did they? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And took down your statement ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is your business? 

A. I am a laborer. 

Q. A day laborer ? 

A. Most of the time, yes, sir. 

Q. Since you have been living in Saginaw have you held any official posi¬ 
tion ? 

A. I have been elected alderman from the second ward one term. 

Q. Any other position that you have held ? 

A. No, sir, not officially. 

Q. When were you elected alderman ? 

A. In the spring of 1S86. 

Q. When did your term of office expire as alderman ? 

A. This last April. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Milo H. Dakin ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long have you known him ? 

A. I think it is about seven or eight years. 

Q. Have you ever been down to Lansing with reference to the Sagiwaw City 
charter ? 

A. Yes, I was down twice before this last time. I have been here three 
times now altogether. 


101 


Q, When did you first visit Lansing with reference to the Saginaw City 
charter ? 

A. It was some time in March, I cannot remember the date now. 

Q. Of this year ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q At whose instance did you come here ? 

A. I was appointed as one of a committee from the council. 

Q. Who were the other members of the committee ? 

A. I cannot remember them all. From the council I think Mr, Tillotson,^ 
Mr. Shackleton, Mr. Oaddington, Mr. Austin; that is all that 1 can call ta 
mind now, I don’t know but there were other members. 

Q. Who notified you that you had been appointed as one of a committee ta 
come down to Lansing, with regard to this matter of the city charter ? 

A. Controller Dixon first spoke to me. 

Q. What did he say to you ? 

A. He asked me if I had got my council proceedings yet, and I said, no^ 
and he says, “You are appointed as one of the committee.” I was not there 
at the council meeting that night that I was appointed. 

Q. If March last was the time when you first came down here, when did you 
come down the second time? 

A. I think in about a week afterwards I came down again. 

Q. When did you come the third time? 

A. It was this last week. 

Q. On the I9th day of April? 

A. I came down on the I8th in the morning. 

Q. Who was to defray you expenses on these several trips; what arrangement 
if any, had been made with regard to them? 

A. Mayor Shackleton came to me and told me he wanted I should go down 
to Lansing with Mr. Dakin, and I told him I was already out about $30 on the 
charter business and I didn’t propose to be anything more out. 

Q. What do you mean by that? 

A. I mean that I had expended about $30 more than I had got back. 

Q. In what way? 

A. In a social way around town. 

Q. Does that include your railroad expenses and hotel bills? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. How much have you expended altogether on your several trips down here 
in the interest of the city charter? 

A. I think perhaps fifty or fifty-five dollars. 

Q. Have you ever received any portion of that back? 

A. I have received $15.00. 

Q. When did you receive the $15.00? 

A. I think it was the first meeting of the council in April. 

Q. From whom did you receive it? 

A. I got my order from the controller and received it from the city treasurer, 

Q. What did you expect to do down here at Lansing in the interest of the 
city charter? 

A. I expected to comedown herewith Mr.Dakin and help him what I could, 

Q. In what way? 

A. Getting acquainted with the members and talking to them some and 
showing them a map and explaining to them as well as I could. 

Q. What was there about the city charter that required yourself and others 


102 


to come down here and explain minutely to the members of the Legislature 
that they could not themselves have ascertained by an examination of the 
charter? 

A. They proposed to detach a portion of territory called Florence and in¬ 
corporate it into Saginaw city. 

Q. Any other purposes? 

A. No, not particularly that I remember of. 

Q. Why did you deem it necessary for you and others to become acquainted 
with the members of the Legislature? 

A. In order to talk with them and show them the philosophy of having that 
attached to Saginaw city. 

Q. Did you talk with members of the Legislature, and if so, with whom? 

A. This last time do you mean? 

Q. On any visit that you have made here. 

A. I talked with Mr. Oviatt, I believe, and to Mr. Snow, I think, on one oc¬ 
casion. I don’t remember that I did. 

Q. And with other members? 

A. I talked with Mr. McGregor. 

Q. And with other members? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You cannot recall all the members that you talked with ? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Manly—I would like to ask the attorney how he knows he cannot recall 
any others. 

Q. Can you give the names of the others you talked with? 

A. No, sir, I cannot remember their names now. I think I talked with Mr. 
Bates in regard to it the last time I was down, and gave him a map of the city. 

Q. On your last trip down here previous to the present one you arrived here 
on the 18th of April, at what time in the day? 

A. About 10 o’clock in the forenoon. 

Q. What did you do after you arrived in Lansing upon that date? 

A. I think we went from the depot right to the Eichle House. 

Q. Whom do you mean by “ we” ? 

A. Me and Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin come with you on the 18th ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What day of the week was that ? 

A. On Monday. 

Q. You got to the Eichle House, and from there where did you go ? 

A. I think we came up here to the capitol from there. 

Q. What did you do on the 18th that you have not already stated in regard 
to the city charter, if anything ? 

A. I don’t think we did anything that day. There was not many members 
here. I think 1 saw Mr. Bates on that day, but did not have much conversa¬ 
tion with him because he understood it, I suppose, as well as I did and per¬ 
haps better. I gave him a map. 

Q Then on the 19th what did you do in regard to the city charter in the 
morning before 10 o’clock? 

A. Monday night we came up here to the house, Mr. Dakin and me, and 
when the evening train came in Mr. Shackelton came up here and after the 
House adjourned we got to talking with Mr. Linton, and Mr. Linton made 
this proposition to him that was sent up here in writing. 


103 


Q. Made that proposition to Mr. Linton? 

A. Ye?, Mr. Linton favored it. 

Q. Was this the identical proposition that was introduced in evidence this 
morning at the time that Mr. Crowley was on that stand that was talked over 
on that occasion? 

A. Yesi sir. 

Q. That is the identical paper? 

A. Yes, sir, that is the identical paper that the other was copied from that 
he had with him. 

Q. Then on the morning of the 19th what did you do previous to 10 o’clock, 
if anything with reference to the city charter? 

A. This was on Monday that I am speaking of. 

Q. I am now speaking with reference to Tuesday the 19th ? 

A. I don’t know that we talked with anybody only Mr. Snow; I think we 
spoke with him. 

Q. You had talked with Shackelton and Linton on the evening of the 18th 
and on the morning of the 19th also ? 

A. No, sir, no more than we went over to the depot with them on the 19th. 

Q What conversation, if any, did you have with Shackelton on the evening 
of the 18th and on the morning of the 19th with reference to this matter? 

A. On the evening of the 18th we were talking with Mr. Linton most all 
the evening, in fact we were here until nearly 12 o’clock when we left the 
House. 

Q. Was that with reference to some compromise ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the conclusion arrived at at that time between Mr. Linton, Mr. 
Shackelton and yourself ? 

A. They came to the conclusion that they would go to Saginaw, and Mr. 
Linton would talk with the people of Oarrolton and East Saginaw, and Mr. 
Shackelton would talk with the people of Saginaw City, and if it were agree¬ 
able, Mr. Linton said, so far as he was concerned, he was perfectly willing it 
should go so. 

Q. You have been here and heard the testimony that has been taken in 
these prcceedings thus far ? • 

A. Most of it. 

Q. You heard something with reference to Shackelton going back to Saginaw 
for some money. Will you state what there is about that as you understand it? 

A. There was nothing said about it on Monday. On Tuesday morning 
when we were going to the train Mr. Shackelton asked me if I got any money 
when I left Saginaw. I told him no, and I put my hand in my pocket and 
pulled perhaps fifty or sixty cents, and I said that is the extent of my pile, and 
he took out $5 and handed me and said he would bring some more when he 
came, and I asked him if he would be through and be back that night, and he 
said he did not know, but he thought he would, but if anything happened that 
he did not he would telegraph us so that I could get some money by telegraph. 

Q. What were you to have money by telegraph for ? 

A. For my expenses. 

Q. What expenses ? 

A. Expenses that I might incur here. 

Q. To be used in a social way ? 

A. Yes, sir, no other way. Nothing of any other way was talked of at all. 


104 


Q. On the morning of the 19th Mr. Shackelton returned to Saginaw. Whom 
did you next see from Saginaw with regard to the city charter, if any one ? 

A. Nobody that I know of. Until the meeting of Mr. Eaton and Mr. Jay 
Smith down here in the hall of this House. 

Q. About what time in the morning was that ? 

A. 1 should judge it was about half past nine o’clock as near as I can 
remember. 

Q. Did you have anything to say with Mr. Eaton or Mr. Smith on that 
occasion ? 

A. As I met them we shook hands and Mr. Eaton asked how things looked 
in regard to the charter. I said they looked first rate and he says ‘‘What did 
Shackleton go back to Saginaw for?” and Mr. Dakin spoke and said “He 
went back with Mr. Linton to fix his matter of Florence, between East Sagi¬ 
naw and Saginaw City, and to bring back some money with him for Fellows^ 
expenses; and Mr. Eaton asked him if he thought any money could be used 
with the members in the interest of the charter, and Mr. Dakin says ^‘Of 
course it could in a social way,” and that was about all that I heard said about 
money. 

Q. Did you hear the entire conversation? 

A. I think I did. 

Q. Have you stated all that took place between the gentlemen that morn¬ 
ing at the time of this meeting? 

A. All that I can recall now at present. 

Q. You heard Mr. Eaton’s testimony with reference to the G. A. R. men 
and what was said on that occasion, did you not? 

A. I heard his testimony. 

Q. What have you to say with regard to that part of the testimony where 
Dakin said there were some G. A. R. men, about thirty, that he could see to 
advantage, or words to that effect? 

A. I did not hear an v such language at all. 

Q. I wish you would try to refresh your mind and give us a statement of 
just what you did hear between those gentlemen in the presence of Mr. Dakin 
that morning in the rotunda of the capitol. 

A. I think Mr. Dakin told me that Mr. Shackelton only brought out about 
$10 with him to pay his expenses and mine, in a kind of a laughing way. I 
think that was said there if I remember right. 

Q. Whose expenses did he mean, Shackelton’s? 

A. Shackelton’s and mine. That is the way Dakin spoke. 

Q. You heard Mr. Eaton in answer to a question yesterday by Judge Holden 
say that he inquired of him, Dakin, how much money he wanted or needed, 
and the next inquiry made of him was “ I asked if we would get a favorable re¬ 
port from the committee, and he said that there is no doubt but that the report 
will be adopted by the House.” 

Q. Do you remember that conversation ? 

A. No, sir; I do not. 

Q. He says next following, the next inquiry I made of him was this: I asked 
if he would get a favorable report and he said “There is no doubt of it if I can 
have what I need to do it with,” that Dakin replied to him in that way. 

A. No, there was no such conversation took place in my hearing. 

Q. Did any conversation of that kind take place can you say. 

A. No, sir; not there at that time. 


105 


Q. At any other time did a conversation of that import take place? 

A. No, sir; not that I heard. 

Q. Mr. Eaton says that he said “ How much have you an idea that you will 
need.’^ Did you hear him make that inquiry of Dakin ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he make such an inquiry Mr. Dakin ? 

A. Not in my presence. 

Q. You were present all the time on that occasion ? 

A. I was present there all the time. 

Q. And heard everything that was said? 

A Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you hear Mr. Dakin reply to him “I cannot tell until I begin to 
work, until I canvas the matter some more? ” 

A. No, I did not hear. 

Q. Was anything of that kind said? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Mr. Eaton testified that Dakin said, now we were out last night. We 
were out till 12 or 1 o’clock with some of the boys. We were out with several 
of them and we spent considerable money. There is four of them who are solid, ’ 
or words to that effect, that he UiSed the word solid,’' and as to their being 
all right. Did you hear any such conversation or anything of that import? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was anything said by yourself or Dakin to Eaton or to ISmith of that im- 
import ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did any conversation of that kind, or with reference to that part of the 
subject, take place in your presence ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did any conversation of this kind take place: “ Mr. Fellows remarked that 
he was promised some money before he came down here, but no one gave him 
any money, and he came with what he had in his pocket; that he had $32 in 
his pocket when he left home. He had paid his expenses and he had used it all 
up. This was on Tuesday, and he said that he came down on the morning 
train, Monday.” Did anything of that kind take place ? 

A. I think I did tell him that I expected some money to pay my expenses 
with, that I was promised some money to pay my expenses with; but I did not 
tell him that I spent $30 the day before. 

Q. Or $32? 

A. Nor $32. 

Q. Nor any particular sum of money? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you tell him you were out with some of the members of the House of 
Eepresentatives the night before? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Dakin tell him he was out with any of the members of the House of 
Eepresentatives the night before? 

A. Not in my hearing. 

Q. You say not in your hearing? You have said before that you heard every¬ 
thing that was said? 

A. I heard what was said. What I mean by that is if he told him so it was 
at some other interview. It was not at that interview. 

15 


106 


Q. This testimony relates to the interview there in the rotunda of the capi- 
tol. He then says: Eaton says, “1 then asked Mr. Dakin how much money he 
had an idea he was going to need and he replied as I stated, that he could not 
tell until he had made a canvass.’’ Did any such conversation or anything of 
that import take place? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did any words to that effect pass between any of these parties in your 
presence on this occasion? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You heard Mr. Eaton’s testimony wherein he testified to the facts sub¬ 
stantially as I have stated them, yesterday, did you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What have you to say with reference to that portion of the testimony that 
I have now called your attention to, and that you heard yesterday as to its being 
true or false, true or untrue? 

A. I should say it was untrue. 

Q. Did you hear Mr. Dakin say to Mr. Eaton “If we should go to a man and 
talk with him and make him any promise, and then for any reason J would fall 
to get the money he would be disappointed and he would go back on us, and 
it would hurt us rather than help us?” •• 

A. No, sir, he did not. 

Q. Did any conversation of that kind take place? 

A. No, sir. 

Q Did he say they could not commence doing any work until they got the 
money? 

A. No, sir, I did not hear that either. 

Q. Did Mr. Eaton as he testified here yesterday use this language ‘T then 
said to Dakin fis this a prudent thing to be talking about the use of money in 
this way?’ ” 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Dakin or yourself say to EatTon as he testified yesterday, “You gen¬ 
tlemen don’t need to be known in this matter all; you furnish the money to 
me; or if you don’t want to trust me, you can give it to Fellows, and I will 
attend to the rest of it?” Did Mr. Dakin or yourself say that here in the 
capitol at the time mentioned? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. He says: “I said ‘ what do you propose to do with it; how do you pro¬ 
pose to use It,’ he said ‘ well, I am pretty well acquainted with a good many 
here.' Now, there is a large number (I think 34 was the number stated) of 
Grand Army men here that are members, and I am pretty well acquainted 
with them, and so is Mr. Fellows.’ ” Did any conversation of that kind take 
place on this occasion? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did any of this conversation that I have related take place on that day or 
any other day in your presence? 

A. Not in the capitol building. 

Q. Did any portion of this conversation take place anywhere on any occasion? 

A. The part of it where it states that he told Mr. Eaton if he had any money 
to use that he wanted to be used in that way, he could give it to Fellows, that 
he did not want it- 

Q. Where did that take place ? 

A. That took place down here in the Windsor restaurant. 



107 


Q. Who said that to Mr. Eaton 

A. Mr. Dakin. 

Q. In your presence ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who else was present ?j 

A. Mr. Crowley. 

Q. Who else ? 

A. Mr. Crowley, Mr. Eaton, Mr. Dakin and myself. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin or yourself say to Mr. Eaton, as he testitied yesterday, 

I will go and see any one of them that I deem proper, and talk with him, 
and if I think I can use some money with him I will make an appointment 
for him to meet Mr. Fellows?’’ 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did that conversation take place in your presence at any time? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. “Then I will see Mr. Fellows and Mr. Fellows will give him what I think 
is proper.” Did that conversation take place? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or anything of that import ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Eaton ask Mr. Dakin or yourself “Is this customary when a bill 
is pending here; do members expect to be seen in this way?” 

A. No, sir, I did not hear any such conversation. 

Q Did any conversation of this kind take place, as stated by Mr. Eaton: 
“He said there were a good many of these Grand Army men and there were a 
good many democrats that were not Grand Army men, and he could not tell 
until he had canvassed the matter.” 

A. No, sir, I did not hear that stated. 

Q. On any occasion ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. “I said ‘ suppose you name them over and let us see.’ ” Was there any 
one named over or did he ask any such question of Mr. Dakin or yourself ? 

A. No, sir, not to name over what Grand Army men do you mean ? 

Q. Yes. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or anyone else ? 

A. He asked Mr. Dakin down there in the restaurant to name over—if I 
remember right—to name over what members he would like to see. 

Q. Is this about all that took place, which you have stated, in the capitol ? 
Have you given the House to understand all the conversation that took place 
between these gentlemen in the rotunda ? 

A. Yes, sir, all that I can recollect. 

Q. Where did you next see the gentleman ? 

A. I next saw him down on the corner of the main street. I don’t remem¬ 
ber the names of them. 

Q. On the corner of Washington Ave. and Michigan Ave ? 

A. Yes, sir, on the north-west corner. 

Q. Did any conversation take place there ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State what conversation took place and who was present. 

A. Mr. Eaton, myself and Mr. Dakin were present. Mr. Dakin and I stood 
there talking and Mr. Eaton came to us and he said “ Well, fellows, Shakel- 


108 


ton didn’t bring you down any money ?” I said “ No, but he gave me five 
dollars and he gave Dakin two dollars.” 

Q. Who was it that said this ? 

A. I said that to Mr. Eaton. 

Q. Where was that ? 

A. Down on the corner of the street. 

Q. Proceed. 

A. And I said “When he gets back to-night he will bring me some more 
enough to bear my expenses while I am here.” And he turned around then 
to Dakin and he said “ Then you think you could use some money here with the 
members in the interest of this charter ?” Dakin said, “ No, sir; I could not use 
any money in any other way than in asocial way with the members.” He said 
“ I don’t know of a member of the House that I could approach with money, that 
I would think of approaching with money.” 

Q. Who said this? 

A. Dakin said this. Eaton said “ Well, I have got some money with me, and 
Little and Crowley are here and I will see them.” 

Q. Who said he had some money with him? 

A. Mr. Eaton, and that he would see them and see if they could not fix the 
matter up; and he started ofif up towards the Lansing House and we stood 
there and alked about three or four minutes I should think, when we saw 
Crowley across the street on the opposite corner towards the river. 

Q. And when this conversation took place, if I understand you correctly, 
there was no one present except Mr. Eaton, Mr. Dakin and yourself? 

A. That was all. 

Q. And then after you saw Crowley did he join your party? 

A. Dakin and I went across there. Eaton had gone up towards the Lansing 
house. Crowley went up and shook hands and he began to inquire about the 
charter, how it looked. We told him we thought it looked favorable. I think 
that I took out this same list, that same proposition that Eaton had written and 
showed it to him. He looked at it a minute and we stood there talking. 

Q. Was anything said about rponey at that time to Crowley? 

A. Oh, no. Crowley said, “Let’s go down and take something. 1 have not 
had anything since I struck Lansing.” That is the way he spoke, and we 
started then and went down to the Windsoi restaurant and went in to get a 
drink. 

Q. Who were in that party? 

A. Mr. Crowley, myself and Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Where was Mr. Eaton? 

A. I don’t know. 

Q. Then where did you go? 

A. We staid in there and talked for a few minutes; came back again on the 
corner. 

Q. Had a drink apiece in there? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did you drink? 

A. I drank some whiskey. 

Q. What did the other gentlemen drink? 

A. Mr. Crowley drank some whiskey and Mr. Dakin drank some wine I 
believe. 

Q. Which way did you go then? 


109 


A. Then we came back on the corner and if I remember right we were there 
two or three minutes before Mr. Eaton came up to us again. 

Q. Then when Mr. Eaton came up where did you go? 

A. We stood there on the corner, and I think Mr. Eaton stated, if I remem¬ 
ber right, to Mr. Crowley, “ Dakin thiuks he can use a little money here in the 
interest of our charter,” and there was some talk there. I don’t remember 
now. I could not repeat any more of it as I know of. I don’t know what was 
said really any further than that; but I know Mr. Eaton said, ‘‘Isn’t there 
some place we can go and sit down and talk this matter over,” and Crowley 
\ said, “ Come on down this way.” So we walked along down to the same res¬ 
taurant that we had just come out of, and they went in, and as they went at 
the door, I said, “ I have got to get some tobacco.” So 1 stepped right into a 
grocery store, right next to it, and got some tobacco, and when I came back in 
and got in at the door of the bar room, I did not see anybody. I stood there 
perhaps half a minute when the bar tender came out from the back room and 
he said, “I guess your friends are in the stall right in here.” I saia, “ Yes,” 
and walked through, and when I went in there, they had had drinks called on; 
liquor was sitting on the table. 

Q. What drinks had they called on ? 

A. There was whiskey left for me any way—(Laughter.) 

Q. What drinks were down by the other gentlemen, do you know? 

A. I think that Mr. Eaton and Mr. Crowley drank whiskey, and I think Mr. 
Dakin drank wine on that occasion. 

Q. How long do you think they had been in this stall before you came up 
and discovered them there? 

A. They could not have been in there more than a minute or two, because 
1 was not gone more than two minutes I think. 

Q. What took place—and I want you to think carefully about it so as to 
state everything that took place while you were present in this stall—what took 
place between those gentlemen? 

A. 1 think Mr. Eaton sat down and said “Now let ue see how we can fix this 
matter up,” and I think he inquired if anybody had a roll call there. Finally 
he said “I have got one myself,” and put his hand in his pocket and took out 
a House roll call and shoved it over to Dakin. “Now,” he said, “those mem¬ 
bers that you think you would like to see, just check them off there will you, so 
that we will have an idea about how many there are.” Dakin took the pencil 
and looked at the paper. He said “This has been checked off,” and Eaton 
said “Then check them off on the other side.” So Dakin checked them off on 
the other side. 

Q. 'fhis roll call was produced how long after you had been in this room? 

A. I don’t think we had been in there over three or four minutes, five min¬ 
utes perhaps. 

Q. Go on and state what took place after that please? 

A. Mr. Dakin took it then and looked it over, counted them up, and as I 
remembered it and as I stated before the committee, I believe, there were sev¬ 
enteen of them ; but I have learned since that I was mistaken, there were only 
fifteen checked off. Then Mr. Eaton handed it back to him again and said, 
“Now just set down the amounts that you wonld like to—that you think 
would be necessary.” Mr. Dakin set down some figures. I did not know 
what they were; did not take the roll call in my hand and I was not in a posi¬ 
tion where I could see, but I know he handed it back to Mr. Eaton and Mr. 


110 


Eaton read over the names and the amounts and figured it up, and I think it 
amounted to 

Q. Who figured it up ? 

A. Mr. Eaton. 

Q, And did he announce that it amounted to $125? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Please proceed now and give us all that took place on that occasion. 

A. I think he called over Mr. Rumsey’s name, said “ $25.’’ 

Q. Who said that? 

A. Mr. Eaton, I think; and Mr. Crowley I know made a laughing remark. 

“ What, Rumsey down for $25 ! ” He said ‘‘ Yes.” Crowley said “ Well, he * 
is a cheap man for that,” or something of that sort; made some remark in 
that way. I could not state positively what it was. (Laughter.) 

Q. Who made this remark ? 

A. Mr. Crowley. 

Q. What else took place ? 

A. I think that is about all of the conversation, only I think Mr. Dakin said 
that he wished that Gov. D. H. Jerome was down here. I spoke up and I said 
“Yes, I wish he was, for there are lots of members here that he could explain 
this matter to that you and I cannot. There is nobody unless it would be a 
few Grand Army men that I could get acquainted with and talk it over with, 
that I could lay this matter before and make any impression upon their minds,” 
or something to that effect. Those are about the words, perhaps not the exact 
words. That is all I can remember. Mr. Dakin said, “Now if you have any 
money to use give it to Fellows.” That is about all I can remember of the 
conversation now that I can bring to mind that was said in there. I think 
that Eaton—in fact I am sure he did—asked Dakin what he intended to da 
with that money, how he intended to use it, and Dakin said, “ Why, in asocial 
way of course.” 

Q. What else was said with reference to the disposition that should be made 
with the money, if anything? 

A. I don’t think of anything more there. 

Q. Did you hear Mr. Eaton’s testimony with reference to what was said about 
Grand Army men, or “G. A. R.” men? 

A. Mr. Dakin did not say anything about Grand Army men there. All there 
was said there was what I said as I have stated. 

Q. What if anything was there said about giving a party at the Eichle house? 

A. Nothing at that time. 

Q. At any other time? 

A. When we went over there somebody said it was about dinner time, we had 
better go and eat dinner, and we went out of there and Mr. Crowley and my- 
sell and Dakin went down to the Eichle House, and Mr. Dakin went through 
into the back room and I followed him right in there and I says, “Dakin, 
what’s the matter with you? Are you drunk or crazy?” He said, “ Why?” 

I says, “ What made you go and check off those names and set down those 
figures?” He says, “I don’t know why.” I says, “Now, that man may 
make you some trouble about that.” He says, “I guess not.” Isays, “I 
hope he won’t, but you have left it open where he has got a good opportunity 
if he sees St.” He says, “ No, I don’t feel any alarmed about it.” So we 
went down to dinner, and after we came up we sat down there in the room. 
Perhaps we had sat there five or ten minutes and Mr. Dakin spoke, What 


Ill 


kind of a scheme would it be it they give you any money to have a party here 
to the Eichle House ?” I says, ‘‘ Here ?” He says, Yes, we can clear out 
the dining-room, and it is a splendid place to dance and we will have a good 
old time.’’ 

Q. Did he say to you at that time that there had been any legislative parties 
there—that members had congregated there and held parties? 

A. No, sir; I don’t think he did; I don’t remember it if he did. I merely 
said, I didn’t know but what it would be a good idea, and if there was any 
money came to me, if he was a mind to invite the crowd there I would pay 
the bills as far as the money went. 

Q. Let me call your attention to Mr. Eaton’s testimony regarding what he 
said about furnishing the money. Did he give Mr. Dakin and yourself to un¬ 
derstand that it was possible that he himself might furnish this money ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Aside from the time you have mentioned? 

A. Yes; we talked it over, and he said that he intended to furnish us somer 
money to spend in that way. 

Q. In what way ? 

A. In a social way in entertaining the members of the House. 

Q. Did you hear Mr. Eaton testify yesterday that Mr. Dakin said Mr. Shackle- 
ton had come down here and he was expected to bring some money to put this 
bill through the House, but he didn’t bring any except seven dollars ‘‘And 
he gave that to us and we have used it, but it didn’t amount to anything, and 
he has gone back to Saginaw to get some more money?” 

A. No, sir, that was not said in my presence. 

Q. In your conversation in Mr. Dakin’s presence that morning was anything 
said about any money being furnished for the purpose of corrupting or using 
with or paying to any members of the Legislature? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you pretty positive about that? 

A. I am positive about that; there was nothing said in my presence. 

Q. What did Mr. Eaton do when Mr. Dakin hesitated, as Mr. Eaton testified 
yesterday, about putting any marks opposite the names of the members? 

A. I don’t know that he done anything any more than he asked him to put 
the figures down there merely to foot up about what amount he thought 
would be necessary to use. 

Q. Please state for the benefit of the House what position they were in? 
Was Mr. Eaton standing over Mr. Dakin as I am over Mr. Bates, or were 
they sitting down by a table with their heads together? 

A. They were sitting the same as one of them here and the other around on 
the opposite corner of the table. 

Q. Did Mr. Eaton act in any way surprised or startled because of the con¬ 
versation there, or in his manners? 

A. Not that I noticed. 

Q. You heard Mr. Eaton state yesterday in answer to the question as I read 
the second name that read Mr. Allen , he said “There is a man I want to 
see ?” 

A. No, sir; there was not such a remark made that I heard. 

Q. Was there any intimation or insinuation that Mr. Rumsey or any one of 
the 15 men named could be corrupted or prejudiced in any way with money? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin in your presence and in the presence of Mr. Eaton on the 


112 


occasion I have referred to here repeatedly disclaim that any money could bo 
used in a corrupt way? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Or used with members direct? 

A. Yes. I heard him make that observ^ation three or four different times. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin state to Mr. Eaton that it was common to have parties or 
gatherings and use money here in Lansing through the Legislature in a social 
way? 

A. No, sir; I don’t remember that he said that. He might have. 

Q. Was there anything of that import? 

A. I don’t recall it to mind now if he did. 

Q. You wanted money to use, you say, in a social way. From whom did you 
get the idea that money could be used in a social way? 

By Mr. Conductor Diekema—That is objected to. We are not here to inves¬ 
tigate the sources of this gentleman’s ideas. 

Mr. Dodge—It seems to me that that is very proper. The gentleman has 
been accused of getting money here to use socially with members and we want 
to show what his motive was, where he got the idea that money could be used, 
and legitimately too, in that way. I do not know but that the idea originated 
with himself. In justice to the witness it seems to me that he ought to be per¬ 
mitted to make that statement. I have no knowledge as to what he will testify 
upon that subject. It certainly is a matter of information for the members of 
this House, they ought to know all there is about this and not have anything 
concealed from them by a technicality, but let everything be opened up so that 
every member may understand the motive of this man. If Mr. Fellows was 
down here with any design and purpose in his mind, or came here and origi- 
vnated a scheme for the first time of prejudicing members in a social way we 
would like to know it. If Mr. Fellows understood from somebody else that it 
would be proper, and right, and legitimate to use money for social purposes, we 
want to know it. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—We are certainly desirous that every bit of infor¬ 
mation relative to the questions at issue shall come before this House. VV'e 
are not trying this witness. There are no accusations whatever against the 
witness. We are trying Mr. Dakin under certain accusations and this testi- 
money is entirely incompetent and immaterial. 

Mr. Dodge—I submit that the testimony in this case has disclosed some 
very unpleasant things for Mr. Dakin and the rest of these gentlemen. Cer¬ 
tainly when a witness upon the stand Mr. Crowley said that he believed this 
money was to be gathered for the purpose of putting it down in Mr. Fellows’ 
and Mr. Dakin’s pocket. I think the members ought to understand whether 
Mr. Fellows had any such intention or not. 

The Speaker—We will let the witness answer. 

A. I cannot say that I ever heard any such intimation, Mr. Dakin and I 
talked it over among ourselves. 

Q. Do you know whether or not it is true that money is frequently used in a 
social way, and cigars given to members of the Legislature in a social way ? 

A. I understand so; I do not know it to be true. 

Q. Have you ever been in any of the committee rooms, either in the House 
or Senate, and had your attention called by the way of a poster or card that in 
order to get legislation through a few cigars would be acceptable, or something 
of that import ? 

A. Yes, I have. 


113 


Q. State what there is about that? 

A. This is all I know about it. I have seen in one or two rooms here some¬ 
thing of the kind. 

Q. What rooms were they that you saw these cards in ? 

A. I could not tell you, some of the rooms upstairs. 

Q. What committee used those rooms ? 

A. I don’t know. 

Q. How did you happen to be in those rooms ? 

A. I was called up stairs; I think that they were to have an investigation 
there, or something of that kind, I forget now. 

Q. You say you saw a card in one of the committee rooms? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did the card read as well as you can remember? 

A. I think one read “We smoke” or something of that kind. I didn’t pay 
much attention to it. 

Q. Did it say anything about “Up goes your bill?” 

A. Yes, I think it did. 

Q. Up goes your bill if what? 

A. I didn’t pay much attention to it; I don’t remember. 

Q. You supposed it was put up there for some facetious purpose. Did you 
have any idea about it? 

A. I thought it was a kind of a way of getting a cigar once in awhile. 

Q. Have you ever seen that kind of a card in any of the other committee 
rooms ? 

A. No, sir, not that I ever noticed. 

Q. Have you ever seen any over in the Senate? 

A. No, sir, I never was in but one committee room in the world. 

Q. Is it not currently reported generally around the capitol here that cigars 
are given to the members and they are treated socially by parties that are in¬ 
terested in legislation; and have you not heard of the meetings of the Third 
House, where oranges and cigars wore given away, and things of that kind 
generally by persons that claim to belong to what is called the Third House? 

A. I cannot say that I have. 

Q. I ask you now if you do not know from general report about the Speaker 
of the Third House, and about their meeting there and about their assessing 
men that are here in the interest of legislation? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—We have nothing to do with the Third House, 
and we object to that. 

The Speaker—The gentleman better confine his questions to the Legislature 
proper. 

Mr. Manley—I would like to ask the attorney the question if he is not a 
member of the Third House. 

Mr. Dodge—I am not. Ex officio, as people say, perhaps I am; I have been 
a member of that house, but 1 am not one at the present time. 

It is not for the purpose of jest or laughter, but simply for the purpose of 
showing that these men get this idea, coming as they do in the interest of leg¬ 
islation, that money can be expended in those social ways for the purpose of 
entertainment and for such purposes as are regarded as perfectly legitimate, 
and for aught I know are legitimate. 

The Speaker—The chair is of the opinion that it would be better to confine 
it to transactions with members of the Legislature proper. 

Q. It is suggested that I ask you if there is a card in the room of the com 


114 


mittee on municipal corporations, before whom the Saginaw charter was to 
he argued, with reference to the giving of cigars; a card referring to the 
giving of cigars ? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to that, as the card is the best evi¬ 
dence. 

Mr. Dodge—We simply want to know where it is. We do not want the 
wording of it. 

Mr. Herrington—I submit if there is any such card they could produce it. 

Mr. Dodge—1 submit that is another caprice objection. I simply want to 
know if there is a card there. I do not ask for the contents of the card. 

The Speaker—Omit that part of the question. 

Q. Was there a card in the committee room on municipal corporations, be¬ 
fore whom the Saginaw charter was to be argued, hanging up in the room. 

A. I could not say, I did not notice. 

Q. You don’t know what room this was in that you saw this card? 

A. I do not. I saw atiard somewhere, in some committee room or in the 
hall, some place up there. I do not know where it was. 

Q. You say you have known Mr. Dakin for eight years? 

A. About eight years. 

Q. During your term of office as councilman did the nomination of Mr. 
Eaton, the complaining witness, come before your body for confirmation as 
city attorney of Saginaw City? 

A. Yes, sir, it did. 

Q. What was done with the nomination by that body? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—We object to that. The purpose of this must 
be to impeach and it is upon an immaterial point and the rule is well settled 
that you cannot impeach a witness upon an immaterial point. 

Mr. Dodge—We do not have any intention of that kind in view. We simply 
want to know something about the relationship between Mr. Fellows and Mr. 
Eaton, and we simply want to know whether or not he was actuated to do 
what he has done in this matter because of the fact that he was rejected by the 
common council of Saginaw for the position of city attorney. It already 
appears in evidence from the lips of Mr. Eaton that he was rejected by that 
body, and now I submit that we have a right to show by Mr. Fellows that he 
himself voted against the confirmation of Mr. Eaton as city attorney. Cer¬ 
tainly it can do no harm. Mr. Eaton testified to that fact. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Then I object to it as repetition. 

Mr. Dodge—We do not know whether we have got the truth about it, and 
we would like to have Mr. Fellows’ testimony. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—It is either impeachment or repetition, and it is 
incompetent in either case. You say he has already testified to it. If it is in 
once it is repetition. If he told an untruth then you are trying to impeach him 
and you cannot impeach him upon an immaterial point. 

The Speaker—I think we will not take this answer. 

Q. Have you ever at any time heard Mr. Dakin suggest, either on the 18th, 
19th or 20th of April, or indeed at any other time, that any one of the mem¬ 
bers of the Michigan Legislature of this session could be approached in an ille¬ 
gitimate or corrupt and improper way? 

A. No, sir, I never have. 

Q. Have you ever heard him say anything about the impossibility of any of 
them being approachable with money. I mean by that have you ever heard him 


115 


say that he did not believe, and felt very positive that none of them could be 
approached improperly? 

A. Yes, sir, I have. 

Q. How many times have you heard him state that? 

A. At least three times. 

Q. Whereabouts was he? 

A. I heard him state it here in the capitol. I heard him state it on the 
corner and also on one other occasion. I don’t know that he stated it so posi¬ 
tively in there, but he said only in a social way. Mr. Baton asked him how he 
intended to spend that money, and he said in a social way. 

Q. I think I understood you to say that you came down here at the special 
solicitation of Mayor Shackelton and the Recorder? 

A. No, sir, I came ac the special solicitation of the mayor. 

Q. You were in the army, were you not ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you are a member of one of the organizations. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What organization ? 

A. The Grand Army of the Republic. 

Q. Was there anything said about your coming up here for the reason that 
you might be able to see members of the G. A. R. ? 

A. It was spoken of that probably I might see some of the Grand Army 
men. I told them I was not acquainted with any of the Legislature and they 
had better send some one else. They said, ‘‘You are a Grand Army man, 
there are quite a number of Grand Army men there, and there are perhaps 
some of them that you can talk with better than anybody else.” 

Q. Was there any understanding with Dakin, or did you have any under¬ 
standing with yourself or thought that you would get money and convert it to 
your own use, as has been intimated by the witnesses here on the stand ? 

A. No, sir, we never did. 

Q. During your acquaintance with Mr. Dakin have you ever discovered that 
he was a man of any bad habits or vices ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What have you to say in regard to his conduct and depQrtment at home, 
and his general reputation for honesty ? 

A. I consider he has a good reputation at home. 

Q. Did you ever hear breathed or insinuated the first word derogatory of Mr. 
Dakin until this matter occurred ? 

A. No, sir, 1 never did. 

Q, I am requested to ask by a member, did you hear anything about Mr. 
Dakin acting improperly in connection with the first charter bill for Saginaw 
City ? 

A. 1 heard it intimated. I don’t know that I could name the person. I 
talked more with Mr. Dickson, our controller, about that than any one else 
that I can think of. He thought he had done a wrong thing. 

Q. State what there is about it? 

A. It appears that there was a committee appointed to revise and amend the 
charter of the city of Saginaw, and I think Mr. Eaton, Mr. Dickson, Mr. Rust 
and Mr. Shackelton were that commitiee, and they drew up a charter, or 
amendments to a charter, and the amendments were almost a new charter, 
and gave it to Mr. Dakin to present to the House. In place of presenting 


116 


that he presented what they called the labor man’s charter, gotten up by the 
labor party. 

Q. Which charter did Mr. Dakin favor ? 

A. The labor charter. 

Q. Which charter did you favor ? 

A. The charter that the council had submitted. 

Q. You and Mr. Dakin did not agree as to which charter should be passed 
by the Legislature ? 

A. I want to tell you how I felt about the matter. 

Q. Please do so. 

A. There were some amendments. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—1 object to that. What difference does it make 
in the trial of Mr. Dakin what this man thought about a certain charter? 

Mr. Dodge—This question was asked at the suggestion of one of this party. 
I asked him about the report circulated with reference to Dakin’s actions here 
and now we want the witness to state in answer to that question not only what 
he understands but the whole transaction. It is proper, and I think the mem¬ 
bers of the House generally want it. 

The Speaker—The objection is overruled. 

A. I did favor some amendments being attached to the charter that was got¬ 
ten up by the mayor and controller and city attorney and committee, but it was 
not attached ; and it was the unanimous vote of the council to adopt the other 
charter and I thought Mr. Dakin did wrong in not presenting the charter that 
was adopted by the council. 

Q. That is all you to desire say ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When you were elected to the city council of Saginaw City, by what party 
were you elected? 

A. By the republican party. 

Q. You are a member of that party in good standing? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Of what party are you a member? 

A. I ran for the same ofiBce on the union labor ti<}ket and was defeated. 

Q. You are a republican Knight of Labor, is that correct? 

A. That is about it. 

The Speaker—Some questions have been sent to the desk: Did you use any of 
the $30 you claim to have spent, with any of the members of the House, and 
if so, what were their names? 

A. I did not spend it with any of them that I know of. 

Q. What do you mean by spending money with the members of the House 
in a social way? 

A. I mean that Mr. Dakin talked of having a party and inviting some of 
the members down there and having a social time in that way. That was his 
idea of it. 

Q. Were you in hearing distance of Mr. Baton and Mr. Dakin during their 
whole conversation on the 19th of this month in the rotunda of the capitol? 

A. Yes, sir, 1 was. 

Q. Might not Mr. Dakin and Mr. Eaton have held a consultation at that 
time and you not hear what they were talking about? 

A. They did not. We were all talking together. I stoo l there listening. 

Mr. Dodge—I wish to call the attention of the witness to one answer that he 
made. Did you mean that you were a Knight of Labor? 


117 


A. No, I meant the Labor Union party. 

f). You are not a member of the Knight of Labor organization ? 

A. No, sir. 

The Speaker—This question is asked: Are you sure that you talked with 
any other member of the House about the Saginaw charter than those you 
have named, Mr. Bates, Mr. Oviatt, Snow and McGregor ? 

A. Mr. Linton also. I think that is about all of them, and Mr. Green. 

By Mr. Dodge : 

Q. You say you appeared before this committee and made a full statement 
of what you expected to testify to here on this occasion ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you make a statement in answer to their questions substantially as 
you have testified here on the stand, so far as they interrogated you upon those 
points ? 

A. Yes, sir, I think I have as near as I can remember now. 

Q. That committee that I refer to is the one conducting the transaction in 
this case, is it not ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did they say anything to you d.bout their wanting you to remain in here 
as a witness, or that they did not want your testimony or anything to that 
effect ? 

A. I think they did say they wanted me to remain here as a witness, to be 
here at ten o’clock the next morning. 

Q. Which one of the members ? 

A. I think it was the gentleman who stands up there now—(Mr. Diekema)— 
I cannot call him by name; I think he told me that if I remember right. 

CKOSS-BXAMIIfATlON BY MR. DIEKEMA. 

Q. Before whom did you first appear, or did you first give a statement of 
this whole affair ? 

A. I first gave it to Mr. Dodge. 

Q. At what time ? 

A. I am sure it was the next day after the exposure here in the House. 

Q. About what time ? 

A. I cannot remember, but I think it was in the forenoon sometime. 

Q. Did you give a full statement of all this at the time? 

A. No, sir; about the same as I did before the committee. 

Q. Was that before you appeared before the committee? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who asked you to go up to Mr. Dodge’s office? 

A. I think Mr. Dakin wanted I should go up. 

Q. Is this the first time you went to Dodge’s office on this business? 

A. No, sir; I think I was up there the night before in Dodge’s office. 

Q. Was that the same night that the exposition took place in the house? 

A. I think it was. 

Q. Who asked you to go up? 

A. Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Did you see any of the attorneys before you made a statement to this 
committee about this matter. 

A. Yes, sir, I saw Mr. Holden, 

Q. Where ? 


118 


A. I saw him here first. 

Q. Made a statement to him? 

A. No, sir, I did not. 

Q. When did you first make a statement to him ? 

A. I never did. 

Q. Did you ever talk with him upon this subject ? 

A. I have talked with him some but he did not make any statement. 

Q. At what time did you first talk with him about it ? 

A. I don’t remember whether I talked with him any about this matter when 
he was out here. I cannot remember that I did. I know you spoke about 
that in the Committee and I have tried to think about it since. 

Q. Did you talk to him in Saginaw about this matter? 

A. Yes, sir, we talked some about it. 

Q. What time? 

A. It was on Sunday. 

Q. Did you go up to see him before Sunday to his office? 

A. Mr. Dakin requested me to see Mr. Holden and have him to be sure and 
appear here Monday morning. I told him I would do so, and I went up to his 
office and he was busy and he wanted to know if I could not come over to his 
office in East Saginaw the next day, and I told him I would. 

Q. That was on Sunday? 

A. This was Saturday I saw him in his office at Saginaw City. 

Q, I >id you go to see him on Sunday? 

A. I did. 

Q. At what time? 

A. I think I got over there about half past ten if I remember right. 

Q. How long did you stay there? 

A. I staid about an hour and a half. 

Q. Did you talk over this subject? 

A. We talked on this subject some. 

Q. That was all before you saw the committee? 

A. Yes, sir, 

Q. What time did you first come to Lansing about this charter business? 

A, It was in the month of March; I can’t remember what date it was. 

Q. How often have you been here in all? 

A. I have been here three times in all. 

Q. Does that include this time? 

A. That includes the time I was here last week. 

Q. This is the fourth time? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. At whose request did you come the first time? 

A. I was appointed by the council as one of the committee. 

Q. Did you appear before the committee here in the House? 

A. No, sir, it was the time that the bill was in the Senate committee and I 
came down a day ahead of the time. 

Q. What bill was that in the Senate committee? 

A. The labor charter as they call it. 

Q. In the interest of what bill did you come here? 

A. I came in the interest of the Saginaw City charter. 

Q. Was that the charter in the Senate that day? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. So you came in the interest of the original bill as prepared? 


119 


A. I had talked with Mr. Dickson and he advised me to advise Dakin—to 
see if I could not advise him—to get that bill back, to let the other one be pre¬ 
sented, and not to try to fight it. 

Q. You came here, then, in order to have that substitute bill withdrawn, did 
you? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was there any committee meeting in the House at that time? 

A. Not that I know of. 

Q. When did you next come here? 

A. If I remember right it was about a week after that. 

Q. Who requested you to come at that time? 

A. Mr. Dickson. 

Q. What oflSce did he have there ? 

A. He was city controller. 

Q. How long did you stay here the first time? 

A. I think I was here three days. 

Q. How long did you stay here the second time? 

A. I think the second time I was only here two days. I would not be posi¬ 
tive how long I did stay either time. 

Q. On what day did you come the first time ? 

A. I think I came on Monday the first time. 

Q. What time on Monday ? 

A. Well, I think it was on the evening train. 

Q. What day did you return? 

A. I think I went home Friday. 

Q. That would be more than three days, would it not ? 

A. Yes, sir, but I say I am not positive whether I am stating that correctly 
or not, because I don’t remember just how many days I was here or what day 
it was when I went home. 

Q. Will you be positive it was not Wednesday you went home? 

A. No, I could not be positive. I think though that I staid three days. 

Q. Will you swear positively that it was not on Tuesday you went home ? 

A. Yes sir, I could, I think. 

Q. You will not swear positively that it was not on Wednesday? 

A. No, sir, I will not. 

Q. At what time did you go home on the day you did go home. 

A. I think I went home on the evening train from here. 

Q. Who was with you the first time you came from Saginaw on this business? 
A. There was not nobody came out only myself. I came out a day ahead of 
the rest of the committee. 

Q. Who returned with you? 

A, I think the whole committee went back. 

Q. Who were they? 

A. That is all those that were down here. I think Mayor Hill was here, and 
Mr. Shaekelton and Mr. Oaddington, Mr. Hudson and I think Mr. Auston. I 
can’t remember all of them. I know there were quite a number down. 

Q. Did they return with you? 

A. I would not like to state whether we all returned together or not. I can¬ 
not be positive. 

Q. You don’t remember whether you went home alone or with the other 
members of the committee ? 

A. I know I went home with some of them but I could not state which ones; 


120 


I didn’t pay any attention, and I don’t remember about that. I know I was 
down here and went back again. 

Q. Did y«u speak to any of the members of the House, at that time, about 
this bill? 

A. At that time ? 

Q. Yes, on your first visit. 

A. I don’t remember that I did. 

Q. Would you remember if you did speak to them about it ? 

A. I think I should. 

Q. So your best recollection is that you spoke to no member of the House 
except to Mr. Dakin about this bill at that time? 

A. I don’t remember that I did. 

Q. Did you become acquainted with any of the members of the House at that 
time? 

A. Not what you might call acquainted. Mr. Dakin introduced me to quite 
a number of the members, but I don’t remember their names, and don’t re¬ 
member now who they were. 

Q. Did you have any social time with any of the members during your first 
visit? 

A. No, sir. I did not. 

Q. Not any? 

A. No, sir. Not that I know of. 

Q. Did not spend a cent of money with any of them? 

A. No, sir. Not that I know of. 

Q. What day did you come down here the second time you visited Lansing? 

A. I could, not state either what day I came down the second time. 

Q. About how long after your first vistit? 

A. As I stated, as nearly as I can remember now, I could not remember pos¬ 
itively. I think it was about a week after my first visit. 

Q. How loug did you stay? 

A, I think I stayed two or three days that time. 

Q. Where did you stop over night during your first stay in Lansing? 

A. At the Eichle House. 

Q. Where did you stop the second time? 

A. At the Eicliel House. 

Q. With whom did you room there? 

A. I think I roomed with Mr. Dakin every night that I have been here, ex¬ 
cepting one. 

Q. Did you speak to any member of the House about this Saginaw charter 
bill the second time you came? 

A. Yes, sir, I think I did. I think I talked with Mr. McGregor. 

Q. What did you say to Mr. McGregor about the bill? 

Mr. Dodge—If the Speaker please, I object to going into the details of what 
Mr. Fellows said to these several members. It is quite impossible, I should say, 
for the witness to remember, and certainly it is very unfair for my brother to 
insist on giving the conversation with the several members. If he had conver¬ 
sations with them, that certainly is enough it seems to me, at least it ought to 
be if it is material at all. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—Almost every one of these members whose names 
have been mentioned here have requested me to ask the question as to what the 
conversation was, and I hope the question will be allowed. 


121 


The Speaker.—The witness will answer the question. 

A. I could not say what I did state. 

Q. Did you urge him to pass this bill; talk to him in any way about his 
helping you with reference to this bill ? 

A. I think I talked with Mr. Oviatt that time. 

Q. Mr. McGregor first ? 

A. I don’t remember what I did say to him about it. 

Q. What did you say to Mr. Oviatt ? 

A. I talked to him something in regard to the amendments that some of 
them wanted to put on, asked him what he thought about it and so on. 

Q. That was at your second visit ? 

A. Yes, sir; I think it was. 

Q. Where did you have this conversation with Mr. Oviatt? 

A. In the hall here. 

Q. Did you give Mr. Oviatt anything, a cigar or anything of that kind. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. With whom else*did you have a conversation ? 

A. I think those are all the members of the Legislature that I talked with 
whde I was down here. 

Q. Mr. McGregor and Mr. Oviatt were the only men you talked to ? 

A. I think they were. I don’t remember talking with any of the other 
members. I don’t recollect it now. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Snow about this matter? 

A. 1 don’t think I ever spoke to Mr. Snow about the charter at all, until the 
last time I was down here, and then just merely asked him what he thought 
about it. 

Q. What did you say to Mr. Snow about it? 

A. As I said I just merely asked him what he thought the prospects would 
be of getting it through. . 

Q. Where was that? 

A. That was here in the House. 

Q. Did you spend any money with Mr. Snow? 

A. No, sir, I did not. 

Q. Did the council pay you for these two trips ? 

A. Yes, sir, they paid me $15 for the two trips, 

Q. And what time did you get the money? 

A. I got it I think the first meeting in April, if I remember right. 

Q. What day was the first meeting in April as nearly as you can recollect? 
Was it during the first week in April? 

A. I think it was about the fourth or fifth of April, somewhere along there. 
Q. What was that fifteen dollars for? 

A. Our railroad fare and hotel bill. 

Q. Didn’t you state upon your direct examination that you had already spent 
thirty dollars before that time of your money ? 

A. I said that I had spent thirty dollars of my own money that I never got 
back on those two trips that I was down here. 

Q. You expected the council to pay you for your expenses, did you not ? 

A. At that time ? 

Q To pay you for your expenses when you came here ? 

A. My regular expenses, yes sir, my hotel bill and car fare. That is all I 
expected, all I put in a bill for. 

16 


122 


Q. Did you ever spend a cent of money in the presence of any of the mem¬ 
bers of this House while in Lansing ? 

A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Was this whole thirty dollars for your private expenditures during the 
first two visits and outside of any of the members of the House of Representa¬ 
tives ? 

A. So far as I know, it was outside of any member of the House? 

Q. Will you tell this House how you happened to spend thirty dollars outside 
of your board bill and your railroad fare? 

Mr- Dodge—That is objected to. 

The Speaker—The witness will answer the question. 

A. 1 spent it around for cigars and such like as that. 

Q. Do you mean to say you spent thirty dollars for cigars? 

A. No, not entirely, for drinks and such like. 

Q. Drinks with whom? 

A. I don’t know as I can tell whom. 

Q. Did you get drunk while here in Lansing? * 

A. I did not. 

Mr. Dodge—I object not only to that question but to the insult offered to 
the witness. If the Speaker will have noticed the questions put by counsel, 
he will agree with me, I think, that his manner is very unkind to say the least. 
For instance, has asked the witness “Do you solemnly swear upon your oath.” 
or on a number of occasions asked him ‘‘if this was upon his oath,” or some¬ 
thing to that effect; has wanted to know when he has made a statement on 
several occasions if that was especially upon his oath. He has asked him ‘ Do 
you swear upon your oath so and so.” Now he asks the witness if he spent 
this money getting drunk. If he spent this money outside the members of 
the Legislature, I submit that how he spent it is not any concern of the Leg¬ 
islature. , 

The Speaker—What is the question? 

The official stenographer read the question as follow : “Did you get drunk 
while here in Lansing?” 

The Speaker—The chair thinks it hardly necessary to ask that question. 

Q. I understand, then, Mr. witness, that the whole of that thirty dollars 
was spent on your first two visits here in Lansing outside of regular expendi¬ 
tures. 

A. That is what I claim; yes, sir. 

Q. Did you spend any more than thirty dollars ? 

A. No; it was about thirty dollars that I spent. 

Q. Did you not spend a part of it playing pedrowith Mr. Dakin ? 

Mr. Dodge—That is objected to. 

Mr. Speaker: Whether the question is asked in good faith, I know not; but 
if so, he had a right to spend the money in his own way, and it is not 
material to this issue, if the money was spent outside of members of the Leg¬ 
islature. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—I desire now to answer the general proposition 
of the attorney upon the other side. He has accused me of asking the wit¬ 
ness, “Do you solemnly swear?” I myself consider an oath a very solemn 
thing, and I desire to so impress it upon the witness. This question goes to 
show the general character of the witness as to his habits while here in Lan¬ 
sing, and It is proper that the members of this House, before whom this wit- 


123 


nesB appears, shall know how to make up their minds as to the honesty of his 
statements. I insist that it is proper. 

Mr. Dodge—I would like to ask counsel if he regards it as making the oath 
any more binding to ask these questions iii the way that he does ? 

The Speaker—the witness will answer the question. 

A. What is the question ? 

The official stenographer read the question as follows: 

‘^Did you not spend a part of it playing pedro with Mr. Dakin ?” 

A. I spent some of it that way. 

Q. Where ? 

A. At the Eichle House, most of it. ' 

Q. Where did you spend the most of this money while in Lansing ? 

Mr. Van Zile—I object to that question. It seems to me that my friends upon 
the other side will hardly press that kind of a question. I fear my friends are 
forgetting what the issue is here. We started in here to investigate something 
about these charges that were made against Mr. Dakin. We are now trying to 
find out what this gentleman, who is not a member of this House, spent as a 
private citizen. 

Before they have finished up they will not be satisfied with finding out what 
he did in Lansing, but I expect the next thing we will hear from Saginaw as to 
what this gentleman has spent there with some of his friends. Can it be pos¬ 
sible that we are to recognize the fact that these gentlemen have sat here and 
solemly passed some rules, among which is rule 6, that we shall proceed according 
to the rules of evidence in courts of justice, and yet have such questions as that 
put to a witness as to what he has spent outside of the members of this House. 
I submit that it could not be proper unless it was something spent here with 
reference to the corruption of the members in regard to this bill. My brother 
wants to go outside. He wants to bring in something about what this gentle¬ 
man has done among the citizens of Lansing or the friends he had met here. I 
say that is preposterous to ask that question. It is entirely outside of the rules 
of evidence. Let us be confined by the very plainly written laws, of evidence, 
and ask the witness questions that pertain to the case. 

One word further if I may be borne with. My brother says he wants to 
prove the character of this witness. How? By proving that he spent money 
with some men that he met in Lansing, who perhaps came from the city of 
Detroit, and spent it in a way thy-t my friend here would not approve of. By 
that means he expects to break down the character of this witness. There are 
ways laid down for the impeachment of a witness, but this is not^ne of them. 
It is not the proper thing. It is a very improper thing to go into the private 
affairs of a witness, even if he is upon the stand testilying and council is cross- 
examining him. There is not any issue to which this question is material, and 
so I say that the objection ought to be sustained. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—One of the charges here, Mr. Speaker, is that 
money was endeavored to be obtained ostensibly for the purpose of using it 
among the members, but really to appropriate it to private use. We propose 
to show here that this gentleman spent no thirty dollars over and above his 
regular expenses here in Lansing. That is what we are now after. One of 
his statements on direct examination is this, that he did spend thirty dollars 
over and above the fifteen dollars he said he was paid by the common council 
of Saginaw, making forty-five dollars while here in Lansing, and we don’t be¬ 
lieve a word of it, and will endeavor to prove our statements. 

Mr. Dodge—Who was the charge preferred against? 


124 


Judge VanZile—There is no charge here that the private property or money 
that belongs to this witness was ostensibly gotten and converted to his own use. 
It is the moneys that they proposed to get from some other parties in Saginaw. 
Now he is talking about $30 of this witness’ own money that they spent, and 
he wants to know “How did you spend your own money, $30 of it,” not what 
he got from the citizens of Saginaw. That is not the question here at all. 
More than that, there is not a syllable of proof in this case thus far that the 
citizens of Saginaw ever supplied these gentlemen with one cent of money, 
except the money that was left here by the mayor just as he was leaving 
town, when this gentleman told him he was out of money. Outside of that 
there is not a syllable of proof in this case. 

The gentlemen have not asked the witness, so far as I now recollect, whether 
or not there was any pool made up in Saginaw and given to this gentleman. 
It is not in proof. It is not charged in the charges here. It is the private 
money or purse of the witness there that they are undertaking to get an ac¬ 
count of as to how he spent it and who he spent it with. 

The Speaker—Would it in any way affect the credibility of this witness if it 
w ould be proven that he did not spend $30 here? 

Judge Van Zile—This is the rule that must always govern in the admission 
of proof. No matter whether it affects his credibility or not, you can ask him 
no question in a court of law except it be a question that is relevant to the 
issue. If there is any question that is relevant to this issue that can be asked 
in any way to affect his reputation and character, ask it. 

You can only go outside of that by proving that he made different statements 
out of court from what he made in court, and then you must ask him with 
reference to statements out of court, that if made in court would be relevant 
to the issue, and one other thing is his reputation among neighbors for truth 
and veracity. Outside ot those there is no other. If it were otherwise we could 
go over the whole domain of all the gossip that ever comes to curse a town. 

Mr. Conductor Deikema—If the gentleman will bear in mind that this is 
cross-examination he will certainly recognize this fact, that it is our privilege 
to sift every statement made by this witness upon his direct examination. One 
of those statements was that he had spent $30 here in Lansing over and above 
all other expenditures, and that $15 of this had been paid back to him by the 
city of Saginaw, and I am now here to test the truth of this statement. 

Judge Van Zile—Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question ? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—No, sir. 

Judge Van Zile—If the gentleman will not permit me to ask him the ques¬ 
tion, I would like to have him state, upon his reputation as a lawyer, if upon 
cross-examination he can go outside of this rule, and ask questions that are not 
relevant to the issue. If he has permitted us to ask questions that are irre¬ 
levant to the issue upon the direct examination, we are not to blame for it. 
He should have objected and had them stricken out. If we have gone outside 
of the issue then he must be content with it, for he is here to watch and see 
that we keep within the issue. If the subject is not relevant to the issue it is 
no more proper from cross-examination than upon the direct. 

That is the rule of evidence and there is no question about it. 

Mr. Conductor Deikema—The rule of evidence is very clear, and we have a 
complete right so sift anything that the gentlemen have seen fit to bring out 
in the direct examination. He may now be sorry for having brought it out, 
but alter it has once been brought out we have a complete right to sift it. 


125 


The Speaker—Let the witness answer the question. 

A. I spent the most of it at the Eichele house that I did in any one place I 
believe. 

Q. During what time, your firstfor second visit ? 

A. My first and second visit I was spending money there all the time, that 
is, evenings, and through the day sometimes; there and other places. 

Q. Did you spend the greater part of it playing pedro with Mr. Dakin ? 

A. Not the greater part of it. I played pedro with others a great deal. I 
played with him some. 

Q. For money? 

A. No, sir. 

Q, Just explain how you spent it ? 

A. Well, spent it as I told you for drinks and cigars and with some of the 
boys that was down here from Saginaw and some strangers here that I didn’t 
know. 

Q. Then you cannot answer now that this whole $30 went for cigars and 
liquor. 

A. The most of it did, yes. 

Q. Where did the rest of it go ? 

A. I cannot say that any of it went for any other purpose. 

Q. Do I understand you now to answer that all of the $30 went for cigars 
and liquor ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was Mr. Dakin present all this time when you were spending this money 
for cigars and liquor? 

A. No, sir, there was some of us, some of the delegation from Saginaw 
here when he was in the House. 

Q. At what house did you register when you came here? 

A. At the Eichel house. 

Q. Did you register immediately upon your arrival here in Lansing? 

A. I don’t remember whether I did or not. 

Q. When you arrived here the first time at what time did you register? 

A. I don’t know whether I registered at all or not the first time, but I think 
I did. I think the night I got here I didn’t register, and I think the next 
morning Mr. Dakin spoke and says: ‘‘ Come up here and register, why don’t 
jou.” i was staying with him and I never thought of it. 

Q. At what time did you come here on the third visit to.Lansing? 

A. I came here on the 3rd day of April? 

Q. Do you remmember what day of the week it was? 

A. It was on Monday. 

Q. Who sent you there? 

A. Mayor Shackelton came to me first. 

Q. On what day did he come to you? 

A. On Sunday. 

Q. What did he ask you to do? 

A. He asked me to come down here to Lansing with Mr. Dakin and do what 
I could in the interest of the charter. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin ask you to come down? 

A. As the mayor said to me, it was Mr. Dakin that requested that I should 
■come down, Governor Jerome and himself and myself and the mayor. 

Q. Did the mayor tell you that it was Gov. Jerome’s desire that you go down? 


126 


A. No, that he told Mr. Dakin to pick out his own committee that he wanted 
to go down here with him, and he did. 

Q. What do I understand you Gov. Jerome said ? 

A. 1 didn’t say Gov. Jeome said a word. I said that Mr. Shackleton told 
me that he requested Mr. Dakin to pick out what committee he wanted ta 
come down here with him, and he said he would like to have Gov. Jerome 
come and myself? 

Q. Was Dakin present during this conversation? 

A. No, sir, there was nobody present but me and the mayor. 

Q. Where was this conversation with the mayor? 

A. It was in Saginaw City. 

Q. Did the mayor at that time agree to pay your expenses? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did he say about expenses? 

A. It was as I stated. I told him that I was already out about 130 on the 
Saginaw City charter, and I didn’t propose to be any more out, and in fact I 
says ‘‘I have got no money to go with.” He says “We will furnish you your 
expenses to go down there, if you will go.” 

Q. Didn’t the mayor tell you that you should go to the controller and that he 
should speak to him about the money? 

A. I will explain that if you will allow me. He told me that he would see 
that I got money to go with, and the arrangement was with me that I should 
meet him Monday night and we would come out together Monday evening and 
that he would speak to the controller and see if he could not get me some 
money advanced to come out heie. And that evening Mr. Tillotson and Dr. 
Barber came up to my house and wanted to know if I couldn’t come down the 
next morning. I told them that I was willing. They told me they wanted me 
to come back and see Mr. Dakin and if he hadn’t just as soon come in the 
morning, and if he had to come down with him. So I went back and saw Mr. 
Dakin and he said he would just as soon come down the next morning as any 
time, so we came in the morning, and for that reason I didn’t see the con¬ 
troller. There was nobody in the controller’s office and I came down. 

Q. How do you know there was nobody in the controller’s office? 

A. I don’t know; I didn’t go there to know in that way, any more than it 
was early in the morning. 

Q. What time did you leave Saginaw? 

A. I left at about*? :45 I think. 

Q. Isn’t the controller in his office at 7 o’clock? 

A. I don’t know; I don’t think you will find him there very often at that 
time. 

Q. What made you say there was nobody in the controller’s office? 

A. What I meant by that was that it was early and I didn’t think there was 
anybody there; but I didn’t go to see. 

Q. Did the mayor tell you he was going there too? 

A. No, sir, he did not. 

Q Did you ask him for any stated sum? 

A. I did not. 

Q. Did you state to the mayor what you wanted the money for? 

A. Nothing more than my expenses was all. 

Q. You stated to the mayor that you wanted your expenses? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you tell him what those expenses would consist of? 


127 


A. I did not. There was nothing said. 

Q. What did you mean by the word expenses? 

A. I meant the money that I spent down here, that they would pay back to 
me, that they would bear my expenses. 

Q. Did you mean for cigars and drinks? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you intend to get the first $30 back then? 

Judge Van Zile—I don’t like to object so often, but it strikes me that it would 
be pretty well to adopt the rule my friends have insisted upon and that he 
should he confined to what was said. What he intended to do is hardly 
relevant here. That is all hearsay anyway. 

The Speaker—The counsel will confine his questions to what took place. 

Q. Was there anything said at that time about what these expenses were to 
consist of ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Had you explained to the mayor what you had spent the $30 for ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. At what time did you arrive in Lansing that day this last time ? 

A. About ten o’clock. 

Q. What did you first do ? 

A. We went right from the train up to the Eichle House. 

Q. Who was with you ? 

A. Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Were any others from Saginaw on the part of this committee present ? 
A- No, sir. 

Q. What did you do that morning before twelve o’clock? 

A. We came up here to the capitol. 

Q. Was there a session upon that day? 

A. Not until evening; no, sir. 

Q. What did you do between the hours of,ten and twelve that morning in 
the capitol? 

A. We didn’t do anything; only come up and walk around and go down 
town. I don’t know just where we went. 

Q. You spoke to nobody about this charter? 

A. Not that I remember. 

Q. Where did you get your dinner? 

A. At the Eichle house. 

Q. What did you do after dinner? 

A. Went out around town. 

Q. Did you speak to any person during that time about the charter? 

A. I don’t think we did speak to any of them until that evening, except we 
spoke to Mr. Linton. 

Q. Where did you take your supper? 

A. At the Eichle house. 

Q. Were you in company with Mr. Dakin during that whole time? 

A. 1 think I was. 

Q. Did you talk over with Dakin during that time how you would get this 
charter through? 

A. I don’t think there was anything said about it then. 

Q. Nothing said about the charter between you and Dakin? 

A. I presume there was something said, but nothing as to how we should 
get it through. 


128 


Q. You arranged upon no plan? 

A, No, sir. 

Q. What time did you go to the house that evening? 

A. I think we came here about half past nine or nine o’clock. We came 
up here just a little while before the session. 

Q. Was there a session of the House that evening? 

A. I think there was. 

Q. What time did it adjourn? 

A. I don’t remember. 

Q. Did you converse with any member except Mr. Linton and Mr. Dakin 
about the charter that evening ? 

A. I don’t think I did ; I don’t know but I did speak to Mr. McGregor that 
evening; I won’t say positively that I did. 

Q. If so do you remember what you said to him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you, up to this tinie, heard any member of this House express his 
opinion against this bill ? 

A. Well, I don’t think I ever did. 

Q. Either before or after ? 

A. No, sir, not against it in particular. 

Q. What conversation took place between Mr. Shackleton, Mr. Linton, Mr. 
Dakin and yourself during that evening here in the House ? 

A. We talked the matter over and Mr. Shackleton made him that proposi¬ 
tion and Mr. Linton thought it was a favorable one, it seemed to him to be all 
right. 

vQ. Did you think it was all right ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

‘Q. You expected the whole matter would be amicably settled then ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What time did you leave the House ? 

A. I think it was about eleven o’clock if I remember right, or later. I think 
it was nearly twelve o’clock when we left here. 

Q. Did you talk to any of the other members that evening ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where did you go when you left the capitol ? 

A. I think we went down here to a restaurant and got some oysters. 

Q. How many of you ? 

A. Mr. Linton, Mr. Shackleton, Mr. Dakin and myself. 

Q. Who paid for them ? 

A. I think Mr. Shakelton did, I don’t remember. 

Q. Where did you next go ? 

A. We went over to the Eichle House. 

Q. Remained there over night ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With whom did you room ? 

A. With Mr. Dakin. 

Q. What did you do the next day ? 

A. We came up here to the House the next morning, I think we came here 
about nine o’clock. 

Q. Did you meet any of the members before nine o’clock that morning ? 

A. I don’t remember that I did. 


129 


Q. Did you have any conversation with the mayor before you came to the 
Capitol ? 

A. Yes; we went down to the train with him in the morning. 

Q. Who went over to the train with him? 

A. Mr. Dakin and myself. 

Q. Were you three alone? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with the mayor about money on your way 
to the train? 

A. Yes, sir. He asked me if I got any money before I left, and I told him 
no, and showed him what I had there, and he pulled out ^5 and gave me, and 
he pulled out $2 more and gave it to Mr. Dakin. 

Q. What did he say when he gave you the $5? * 

A. He said that when he came out again that evening he would bring me 
some more, enough to bear my expenses while I was here. 

Q. Was that all he said ? 

A. No, sir, he said that if anything happened that he didn’t come back that 
night he would telegraph me. 

Q. What would he telegraph ? 

A. He would telegraph so that I could get some money by telegraph. 

Q. Did you ask him to bring any more money ? 

A. No, sir, I did not. 

Q. Did you ask him for the five dollars in the first place? 

A. I did not. 

Q. What did he say to Dakin when be handed him the two dollars? 

A. He handed him the two dollars and Mr. Dakin took it and he says. 
Here, I don’t want this.” And he says, “ Take it and buy some cigars.” 
And Mr. Dakin says “I don’t smoke,” and offered it back to him, and he 
said then, ‘‘ Take it and buy yourself some beer,” and Mr. Dakin put the two 
dollars in his pocket. 

Q. Was that all that was said to Dakin at that time? 

A. Yes, that is all I remember that was said. 

Q. Did Dakin ask the mayor for the money? 

A. No, sir, not that I heard. 

Q. Nothing was said, and no money was asked for either by you or Mr. 
Dakin? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. I understand now that you have given the exact language that was used 
by the mayor to you and Mr. Dakin when the money was handed over? 

A. Just as near as I can remember it, yes. 

Q. Where did you and Mr. Dakin go after you left the depot? 

A. We came back over town. 

Q. Where did you go next? 

A. I don’t know. We were walking arond town here I think until about 
nine o’clock. 1 could not say where we were in that time. 

Q. Did you meet any members of the house? 

A. I don’t remember that we did. 

Q. Didn’t you talk about this charter to anybody? 

A. Not that I remember of. 

Q. Where did you next go? 

A. We were here. 

Q. How long were you here in the House? 


130 


A. I guess probably we were about three-quarters of an hour. 

Q. Did you talk to any of the members about the charter ? 

A. No, sir, I did not. 

Q. Were you with Dakin during this time? 

A. I was with him the most of the time. 

Q. Did Dakin in your presence talk about the charter ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where did you go next ? 

A. We went over town. 

Q. Who did you meet on your way ? 

A. Mr. Eaton and Mr. Jay Smith. 

Q. About what place in the capitol ? 

A. We met them down in the corridor or the rotunda. 

Q. Who spoke first ? 

A. I could’t say who spoke first; We shock hands and Mr. Eaton spoke 
and wanted to know how things looked in regard to the charter. 

Q. Who answered ? 

A. I did. I said it looked first rate, and he wanted to know what Mr. 
Shackleton had gone home for. and Mr. Dakin spoke that he had gone home 
with Mr. Linton to fix up the matter betwixt East Saginaw and Saginaw City 
and to bring back some money for my expenses. 

Q. For whose expenses ? 

A. “ For Fellows,” he said. 

Q. Was that all the conversation ? 

A. No, sir; I think that Mr. Dakin then spoke and said that Shackelton 
came out here and only had ten dollars to pay his expenses and Fellow’s, and 
that he would expect to bring out some more money with him to pay expenses, 
and I think Mr. Eaton asked him then if he thought any money could be 
used here with the members in the interest of the charter, or words to that 
effect. 

Q. What was the next thing ? 

A. Mr. Dakin says “ Why of course we can, in a social way.” 

Q. Did you say anything ? 

A. No, sir; I don’t remember that I did. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with Eaton at that time ? 

A. I told him this proposition that Mr. Shackelton had made. 

Q. Was Mr. Dakin present at that time ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where was Dakin ? 

A. Dakin and Mr. Smith had gone on a little ways and Mr. Eaton says—or 
I says—“ Hero, Mr. Eaton,” and he turned around and we stepped up towards 
the clock and I showed him the paper. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Jay Smith, of Saginaw? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The witness who testified here this morning? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you hear his testimony? 

A. I could not hear much of it. 

Q. When Mr. Smith testified that Mr. Dakin said that the mayor had gone 
home to get some money to get the charter through, that was false, was it? 

A. Yes, because I did not hear any such conversation. 

Q. Where did you next go? 


131 


A. After we left the capitol? 

Q. Yes. 

A. We went down onto the corner here. 

Q. What corner ? 

A. The corner of the two main streets down here. 

Q. Whom did you meet there? 

A. We met two or three going down that Mr. Dakin stopped and spoke to; 
I didn’t know who they were. 

Q. Did you speak to anybody about the charter then? 

A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Where did you stop? 

A. On the corner. 

Q. On what sidewalk did you go down ? 

A. On the left hand side of the street. 

Q. Was anybody else present on the corner but you two? 

A. Not at that time. 

Q. What were you talking about at the corner? 

A. I could not remember. 

Q. How long did you stand there before Mr. Eaton came? 

A. Perhaps five minutes. 

Q. Were you talking about the charter during that five minutes? 

A. I could not say what we talked about. 

Q. You simply stood still? 

A. Probably we were talking. I don’t remember what about now. 

Q. You don’t remember a word that was said there ? 

A. No, sir, I do not. 

Q. What happened next? 

A. Mr. Eaton came up to us then. 

Q. What conversation took place between Mr. Eaton and you at that time? 
A. Mr. Eaton came up a-jd he says “Fellows, Shackleton didn’t bring you 
down any money.” 

Q. This was about five minutes after you had left Mr. Eaton in the capitol? 
A. No, sir, it was probably 15 minutes after. 

Q. Where had you been during this ten minutes? 

A. As I told you before, Mr. Dakin had stopped along down the walk and 
talked with two or three people. 

Q. How long did you stand talking with Mr. Eaton before Mr. Crowley 
came? 

A. Mr. Crowley didn’t come up to us there. 

Q. How long did the conversation between you and Eaton last there? 

A. He might have been there talking perhaps five or ten minutes, may be 
longer. 

Q. When did you first see Crowley this morning? 

A. After Mr. Eaton had left. 

Q. What did you say to Mr. Crowley? 

A. I don’t remember what I did first say to Mr. Crowley. I went up and 
shook hands with him, and he wanted to know how things looked in regard to 
the charter, 

Q. Did you hear the testimony of Mr. Crowley here this morning? 

A. Yes, sir, 1 heard the most of it. I didn’t hear all of it. 

Q. When Mr. Crowley testified that you said it would be necessary to expend 
some money in order to get the charter bill through, was he testifying the truth 
or a falsehood? 


132 


A. 1 couldn’t say. I wouldn’t say that he said that, I don’t think he did. 

Q. If he said that was it false? 

A. I have stated that I don’t think I did. 

Q. If Mr. Crowley said during his testimony this morning that Mr. Dakin 
said that it would be necessary, and that the mayor had gone to Saginaw to get 
some money in order to get the charter through, was he stating the truth or a 
falsehood ? 

A. I can say that he might have said so, but I don’t remember it. I would 
not say it was false. 

Q. Dakin might have said so ? 

A. He might, or I might have said something. I don’t remember any 
such conversation. I would not say there was no conversation took place, but 
there might have been. 

Q. How soon did Eaton go away from you ? 

A. I think perhaps it was twenty minutes after that. 

Q. Did you stand twenty minutes talking on the street corner ? 

A. No, sir, we did not. We went down to the restaurant and got something 
to drink, and was in there a few minutes. 

Q. What further conversation did you have about money in the restaurant 
at that time or on your way going or returning ? 

A. I don’t think we had any. 

Q. Will you give us now the conversation that took place in the restaurant, 
the whole of the conversation that took place after you got in the stall in the 
restaurant ? 

A. I think Mr. Eaton asked the question if anybody had a roll call about the 
first. I think he says, “Now we will see if you can fix this thing up in some 
way, and talk this matter over,” and I think he asked if there was nobody had 
a roll call, and he says, “ Well, come to think, I have got one myself,” put his 
hand in his pocket and took it out and shoved it over to Mr. Dakin. He says, 
“ Now, to get at your idea who you would want to see in this matter, check 
off their names.” 

Q. Down there in the stall, when Mr. Crowley testifies that Mr. Dakin re¬ 
peated again that in order to get the charter bill through it would be necessary 
to use some money, and that the Mayor had gone after money, did he state the 
truth or a falsehood ? 

A. He did not state it in my presence. If he did, I didn’t hear it. 

Q. Is it possible that that statement was made in your presence ? 

Q. Why, yes, it was possible that it might have been said and I not taken any 
notice of it. 

Q. Would’t you have taken any notice of such a statement? 

A. I don’t think it was, I could say that it was not, 

Q. Then if Mr. Crowley testifed that it was a falsehood, was it? 

y. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you go after you left this saloon? 

A. Down to the Eichle house to dinner. 

Q. Where did you go after dinner? 

After dinner, I think probably it was half past one, we started away from 
the Eichle house and walked up towards the capitol here and went down the 
street. 

Q. Did you come to the building here? 

A. No, sir; we didn’t come to the building. 

Q. Where did you go next ? 


133 


A, I think we went from there down to North Lansing. 

Q. With any of the other members ? 4 = 

A. No, sir, we walked down there just for a walk; If told him I would like 
to go down and see the town. 

Q. You and Mr. Dakin ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you have any conversation about the charter at that time ? 

A. I don’t recollect; if I did I don’t remember. 

Q. Did you talk any going down there ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What time did you return from North Lansing ? 

A. I think we got back here about four o’clock or half past three. 

Q. What did you do then ? 

A. I can’t tell where we did go. I know we came up here to the capitol, but 
I don’t think we came in. 

Q. Did you meet any members of the House of Representatives at that time? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Was the house in session during that day? 

A. I think it was. 

Q. And you strayed away with Mr. Dakin? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Had you and Mr. Dakin any business in North Lansing? 

A. I had none, 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin seem to have? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What time did you come back in the house that day ? 

A. I think it was about four o’clock when we got back up here. 

Q. Did you come here in the House? 

A. I don’t think we came in. We came up to the steps, and I believe we 
met Mr. Tillotson and P. 0. Andre and some people from Saginaw and I think 
we stopped and talked awhile and went down town again. 

Q. Where did you first meet Mr. Tillotson that day? 

A. I first met him before we went down there on the corner. 

Q. Was Mr. Dakin present at that time? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you present when Dakin told Tillotson that he had marked this 
roll? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you present when Dakin told Tillotson that in order to get the 
charter through it would be necessary to spend some money on the members? 
A. No, sir, I was not present when Dakin told him that. 

Q. When Tillotson said that in your presence and in the presence of Dakin, 
Dakin told him this was false? 

A. I think that I told Tillotson that Dakin thought it was necessary to have 
some money here to spend with the members in taking them out and for a 
social time. I think I was the one that made that remark. 

Q. Then Dakin said nothing about money to Tillotson at that time? 

A. I don’t remember that he did. 

Q. Are you sure? 

A. I would not be positive, but then I am sure that I said that to him. 

Q. Do you know what Dakin said? 


134 


A. No, I don’t know. I don’t think he said anything to me in regard 
to money. 

Q Tiliotson swears that when Dakin told him about marking the list, and 
receiving money, he said, “Great God, Dakin what have you done?” Was 
that talse also? 

A. I would say that Dakin did tell Tiliotson that he had marked the roll. 
That is what I mean to say. 

Q. Did Dakin tell Tiliotson what he was going to use this money for? 

A. I don’t remembei that he did. 

Q. Did Dakin tell Tiliotson how much money he was going to use? 

A. I don’t think he did. 

Q. Did Dakin tell Tiliotson how much money was set opposite the names? 

A. He might have said so, but I don’t remember it now. If he did say so, 
I could not remember whether he did say so or not. 

Q. Where did you go after you came to the capitol? 

A. I would not say, but I think we were around town and down at the Eichle 
House playing pedro, something of the kind. 

Q. Who was playing pedro ? 

A. I think I played some. I think Mr. Dakin played with me some. 

Q. Up to about what time were you there ? 

A. Well, we were there to supper. 

Q. You remained there until supper time ? 

A. 1 think we did, but I won’t say but I took a walk. 1 don’t remember. 

Q. Have you now given me all that happened that afternoon ? 

A. All that I can remember, yes, sir. 

Q. Is it not a fact that you and Dakin together went to the telegraph office 
that afteri oon ? 

A. Well, we did, yes, sir. 

Q. To how many telegraph offices did you go. 

A. We went to two. 

Q, What did you go there for? 

A. We went there because Dakin said “May be Shackelton has telegraphed 
some money,” and we went there to see. Dakin went in and I think 
I went with him into the first telegraph office, down towards the bridge, 
towards the corner. He went in and I think I stepped in behind him, in fact 
I am sure I did, for I heard him ask if there was any telegram there for Fel¬ 
lows or Dakin. 

Q. How many times did you and Dakin go to the first telegraph office ? 

A. Only once I think. 

Q. Will you be positive as to that ? 

A. I can’t remember going there only once. 

Q. How many times did you go to the second telegraph office? 

A. I think we only went to both of them once. 

Q. Did you go into the first telegraph office? 

A. Yes, sir, I went in. I think I went inside of the door. 

Q. Who asked for the telegram then? 

A. Dakin. 

Q. Who asked for a telegram in the second office? 

A. Dakin. 

Q. You went into both telegraph offices, then? 

A. I don’t think I went inside of the second one; I don’t know but I did. 
I would not say whether I did or not. 





135 


Q. DidnH you state a moment ago that you heard Dakin ask in the second 
telegraph office whether there was a telegram for Fellows and Dakin? 

A. I don’t think I did. I said in the first office he said that. 

Q. So you don’t know what Dakin did say in the second telegraph office. 

A. I presume he asked the same question. I don’t know to be positive about 
it. 

Q. Who expected the telegram, you or Dakin? 

A. I don’t know I am sure. He asked for both of us. I supposed he 
thought— 

Q. Answer the question, please. 

A. I will, as straight as I can. 

Q. Did you not state a moment ago that the Mayor had told you that he 
would send you a telegram? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How does it happen then that Dakin inquired and you were not even in 
the telegraph office? 

A. I don’t know. I suppose Dakin thought he would go and see if there 
was a telegram there. I don’t suppose he thought anything about it. I know 
I didn’t. I know he spoke about going to the telegraph office to see if there 
was a telegram, and I know he did the inquiring. I don’t know why he did. 

Q. Did you expect any telegram except the one sending the money; Were 
you expecting any other telegram ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where did you next go ? 

A. I think we went down to the house. I can’t remember where we did go 
exactly. 

Q. Did you remain during that evening at the Eichle House ? 

A. I think we did until pretty nearly train time, when we went over to the 
train. 

Q. What did you go over to the train for? 

A. To meet a delegation from Saginaw. 

Q. Whom did you expect to come from Saginaw? 

A. Expected Shackelton and Linton would be in. 

Q. Did you meet Shackelton at the train? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ask Shackelton on your way from the train to the hotel, whether 
or not he brought any money? 

A. I did not. 

Q. Did Dakin ask him that question? 

A. Not to my knowledge, he did not, not in my presence that I heard. 

Q. When did you first ask him whether he had brought any money or not 
after his return from Saginaw that evening? 

A. I did not ask him at all whether he had brought any money from Sag¬ 
inaw. 

Q. You did not ask Mr. Shackelton at all, after his return, whether he had 
brought any money? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin ask Mr. Shackelton that? 

A. Not to my knowledge. 

Q. Did you ever ask Mr. Shackelton after that whether he had brought any 
money? 

A. No, sir. 


136 


Q. Or Dakin, to your knowledge? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. So you mean to say you went to the telegraph office in the afternoon to 
find out whether there was a telegram here, whether money had been tele¬ 
graphed over, and did not have interest enough in the dispatch to ask Mr. 
Shackelton whether he had brought the money or not? Do you mean to say 
that? 

A. That is what I mean to say, that I did not ask him for any. 

Q. What did you say relative to the Grand Army boys? 

A. At the time we were in the restaurant? Is that what you refer to? 

Q. When did you first speak about the Grand Army boys? 

A. That is the only time that I remember saying anything about them. 

Q. What did you say about them ? 

A. I said there was nobody here I could talk to and show the situation up to 
them unless it might be some of the Grand Army boys that I could talk over 
old times with and get acquainted with and such like. 

Q. How did you expect to use this money among the Grand Army boys ? 

A. What money ? 

Q. Any money you might get. 

Mr. Van Zile—He has not testified as to using any money among the Grand 
Army boys. The question assumes that he has sworn to something that he 
has not sworn to. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—He stated that in a social way some money could 
be used among the Grand Army boys. 

Mr. Dodge—We desire to refer to the minutes if the council insists upn that. 
We insist that no such statement was made on his direct examination. He 
said he could talk with some of them. 

The Speaker—What is the question ? 

The official stenographer read the question as follows: “ How did you ex¬ 
pect to use this money among the Grand Army boys ?” 

A. What money? 

Q. Any money you might receive? 

A. I did not expect to use it among them except in a social way. I never 
made any mention about using any money with the Grand Army boys. 

Q. You were asked to come here because you were a Grand Army man and 
could talk to some of the Grand Army boys, were you not? 

Mr. Dodge—I object to that for the reason that the witness has answered that 
question at least half a dozen times. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—I have not asked that at all on cross-examination. 
I am only referring to the direct examination now. 

The Speaker—Let the witness answer the question. 

A. I was asked to come here, yes sir, and there was something said at that 
time about that. 

Q. Since you arrived in Lansing, have you seen a single Grand Army boy 
about this bill? 

A. I don’t think I have. 

Q. You have not spoken to one? 

A. Not that I remember of, I have not. 

Q. You said you had a conversation with Dakin about a dance at the Eichle 
House. Who were to be invited to that? 

A. There was nothing said about it to me, as to whom we intended to invite 
at all. I stated all the conversation that I had about it. 


137 


Q. Whom did you think were to be invited—those fifteen? 

A. I expected that there would be members of the House. I don’t know as 
I expected those fifteen, for I did not know who they were. I expected that 
we intended to invite some members from the House. 

Q. Did you and Mr. Dakin go to the Hudson House to see Eaton after you 
had this conversation with Tillotson? 

A. No, sir, we did not. 

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION, BY MR. DODGE. 

Q. There has been some considerable rivalry between Saginaw City and East 
Saginaw with reference to the charter, I believe, has there not? 

A. Yes, sir, and Carrlton also. 

Q. Was not the idea of using this money to maintain a lobby here on the 
part of Saginaw as against East Saginaw, which had rival interests in the 
charter? 

A. The idea of using money—I don’t know that there was any idea. 

Q. To use it for the purpose of entertaining the lobby members here gener¬ 
ally that were working in the interests of Saginaw or for their expenses in the 
interest of this charter? 

A. That is what money was talked of for. That was the way they expected 
that they would spend it—in a social way with the members. 

Q. How long were you here on this occasion that you spent the thirty dol¬ 
lars ? 

A. Six or seven days altogether. 

Q. Did you regard the sum of thirty dollars as a very extravagant waste of 
money in view of the business you was down here on ? 

A. I think I spent more than I ought to. 

Q. Did you spend any of this money in becoming intoxicated, yourself or 
any of your friends that were associated with you? 

A. No, sir; I did not. 

Q. You stated that Mr. Crowley might have been mistaken and that he told a 
falsehood. You did not mean to say by that that you believe Crowley is a man 
in the habit of telling falsehoods? 

A. No, sir, I do not mean to be understood that way. 

Q. Yon think if he stated as counsel repeated it, that he must have been 
mistaken? 

A. I think he must have been mistaken. 

Q. After your examination by counsel and since you have had time to reflect, 
do you think there was anything said either down here in the stall, in your ^ 

presence, or down here in the rotunda, but what you heard, as you stated here 
on your direct examination? 

A. No, sir, I don’t think there was anything. 

Q. Did you ever tell any one that you had used thirty dollars for any other 
purpose than you have to-day stated? 

A. No, sir, I never did. 

Q. Did you ever have any intimation from Mr. Dakin, either directly or indi¬ 
rectly, one way or the other, that Representative Rumsey or any other laiember 
of the House could be approached with money, or by any corrupt method? 

A. No, sir, I never did. 

Q. Did you yourself imagine or think you could approach any one of the 
members of this honorable House with money for any corrupt purpose? 

A. No, I never did. 

18 


138 


RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR, CONDUCTOR DIEKEMA. 

Q. Are you a laboring man? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You work for your living, do you ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What labor are you engaged in? 

A. Well, I have worked a good deal for the Saginaw Street Railroad Com¬ 
pany. I worked there several years. 

Q. How long is it since you worked for the Saginaw Street Railway Com¬ 
pany? 

A. It has been about five years, I guess. 

Q. That was five years ago. What did you work at last year? 

A, I have been in the excavating business for the last five years. 

Q. During the last year ? 

A. During the last five years, during summer seasons. 

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DODGE, 

Q. In what capacity did you work for the Saginaw Street Railway Company? 
A. I was conductor on the cars there for about fourteen years. 

Q. Fourteen consecutive years? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You were in the army how long ? 

A. I was in about two years and three months. 

Q. You are in rather poor health now are you not ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you have been for some time past ? • 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you ever intoxicated in Saginaw City, or Lansing, or elsewhere in 
your life ? 

A. I never was intoxicated in my life. 

RE-CROSS EXAMINATION BY Mil. CONDUCTOR DIEKEMA. 

Q. How long did you say you worked as a street car conductor ? 

A. I think it was about fourteen years, or nearly that, that I worked for 
the Company. 

Q. Did you work any for them as a conductor since the present system of 
bell checking or registering came in vogue ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

• Q. How long? 

A. I woiked for them I think as much as three or four years after that. 

Q. Do you make the statement here that you worked three or four years for 
that company after that system came in vogue? 

A. Yes, sir 
By Mr. Dodge: 

Q. Who was president of that company for which you worked and under 
which that system existed? 

A. D. H. Jero.me. 

Q. Ex-governor of Michigan? 

A. Yes sir. 

The following question proposed by a member of the House was sent to the 
Speaker’s desk, and read by the Speaker 


139 


Q. What did yon say or do to any member or employe of the House at any 
time that you though would assist in the passage of the amendments to the 
charter of Saginaw in the House? 

A. Nobody but Mr. Linton that I now recall. 

Mr. Dodge—Did you ever represent to any one that you were an experienced 
lobbyist? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. When you came down here did you do what you thought best to do under 
the circumstances, in the interest of the charter? 

A. I did. 

Q. At what time did you leave when you say you had the conversation with 
Mr. Linton ? 

A. I left Monday evening. 

Q. Any other time ? 

A. I don’t think I have, 

Q. When you answered a moment ago that you thought you had done what 
you possibly could in the interest of this charter, did you mean to say that by 
doing absolutely nothing you did what were for its best interests ? 

A. I considered there was not much to do after the arrangements had been 
made with Mr. Linton until they got back. 

Q. Then what was the nature of this business if you thought, as yon 
answered a moment ago, that you thought the thing was compromised and 
would be settled ? 

A. I can tell you that Mr. Tillotson, after he found out what Mr. Dakin had 
done, he told me, “Now, Giles, just let this thing drop, because it may make 
some trouble.” 

Q. What thing drop? 

A. This in regard to having a social time with the boys. 

Q. At what time was that? 

A. That was the time I was speaking to you of, that I saw Mr. Tillotson down 
here on the street, after Mr. Dakin had told Mr. Tillotson what he had done. 
It was not but a short time after that before Mr. Tillotson went up to the Hud¬ 
son house to see* Mr Eaton to see if he could not get it. 

Mr. Dodge—Has there been any cause for a jollification or a social time or 
anything in the way of an entertainment since the differences have been settled 
between Saginaw City and East Saginaw regarding this charter? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Conductor Deikema—Was there ever before this? 

A. No, Mr. Dakin and I never spoke to anyone else. 

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DODOE. 

Q. What do you mean by Dakin and yourself? 

A. I mean we are the only ones that ever talked it over at the Eichle House. 

Q. Did you understand the question of counsel? He asked you if there was 
any occasion before for having such an entertainment as I have mentioned, or 
any sociability, if it was deemed necessary? 

A. Well, I deemed i: necessary to do all that we could do in the interest of 
that, if Mr. Linton was going to oppose the bill. 

Q. Was that deemed necessary by anyone else other than yourself—by Mayor 
Shackleton? 

A. Yes, it was. 


140 


Q. Who else? Mr. Eaton ? 

A. I don’t know I am sure what they thought about it. All I could state 
was for myself. 

Q, Any one else besides Mr. Shackleton? 

A. Nobody said anything to me about using any money for that purpose 
that I know of. 

Q. But for the purpose of coming down here in the interest of the charter? 

A. That was ail. 

Q. These several committees were appointed for that purpose, and since they 
made the compromise there has been no occasion for their being here, has 
there ? 

A. I do not see any, no, sir. 

EE-CROSS EXAMIi^ATIOK BY MR. OEIKEMA. 

Q. When you stated a moment ago in answer to a question proposed to you 
by your counsel, whether the mayor knew anything about this and you said 
yes, what did you mean; that the mayor knew about the money being used in 
this way? 

A. I never had—if I said so, I misunderstood it. The mayor has never said 
anything to me. 

Q. So you mean to say now that the mayor knew nothing about this money 
being used in a social way? 

A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Were you present here when Mr. Crowley testified that Mr. Dakin said to¬ 
day is the day they ought to have the money because Mr. Linton is absent from 
Lansing? 

A. I say that Mr. Dakin did say that if there was any money to be used in a 
social way among the boys, it ought to be done while Mr. Linton was gone if 
they deemed it necessary. 

When did you expect Mr. Linton bank? 

A. Tuesday night. 

A. That same evening. 

Q. So Mr. Dakin said it would be necessary to use that rnxmey in a social 
way during that day ? 

A. He said it should be used, then if it was used at all. 

Q. How could it be used then ? 

A. That I don’t know, there was nothing said to me. 

Q. Mr. Dodge.—At the time Mr. Dakin received this two dollars from the 
mayor did he repeatedly refuse it and decline to take it ? 

A. I think he did at three different times. 

TESTIMONY OF REPRESENTATIVE E. N. BATES. 

Kepresentative E. N. Bates, having duly affirmed, testified as follows: 

Examined by Judge Van Zile. 

Q. You are a member of the House of Representatives ? 

A. Yes, sir * 

Q. You are a member of the committee on municipal corporations ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was that the committee before which the Saginaw charter bills were 
pending ? 

A. They have been before our committee. 

Q. I want to ask you if in the committee room there have been any cards 
hanging up with certain printed matter upon them with reference to cigars ? 


141 


A. There is a sheet of paper in the room I think having a printed device 
upon it. 

Q. What is it? 

A. It is something to the effect that we smoke, if you don’t up goes your 

Q. How long has that been in the committee room? 

A. I cannot tell. I think perhaps about six weeks or two months. 

Q. Was it in the committee room during the time that the Saginaw charter 
bill was pending before the committee? 

A. I think the Saginawians never were in the room where the municipal cor¬ 
porations committee usually meet. There might have been small delegations 
of them in there, but they never mot us there. We usually adjourned to some 
larger room. 

Q. Are those cards and signs up in other committee rooms? 

A. I could not tell you. 

Q. Do you know or not of occasions where gentlemen have been referred to 
that sign, or whatever you may call it, when they were presenting bills before 
the committee? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember that that has been done on more than one occasion? 

A. I think it has. 

Q. Do you remember whether or not immediately upon such reference money 
has been produced for purchasing cigars? 

A. That depends largely upon the size of the man. 

Q. About what sized man do you generally require that of? 

A. Small men do not usually contribute. 

Q. Large men do, you mean to say. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I understand your answer then is that there have been such occurrences 
there? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. On more than one occasion? 

A. I think I recollect two occasions. 

Q. That has been in other sessions that you know of? 

A. I never knew of its happening before. 

Q. Is it anything uncommon for assessments to be made upon members of 
the Third House here in the interest of legislation. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—By whom? 

Judge Van Zile—By the committee I suppose. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—If it is by the committee I have no objection to 
it. 

A. I never saw one made. 

Q. Do you remember whether or not some such card as that was up in the 
committee room where Mr. Dakin was a member of the committee ? 

A. I never have seen a card of that nature in any other room except in ours. 

Q. You say some gentlemen have furnished money when that was referred 
to ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the money to be used for? 

A. It was generally supposed it was to be used to purchase cigars. 

The following question was sent up by a member, and read to the witness by 
the Speaker: 


142 


Q. Did certain gentlemen from Detroit pay the committee on municipal cor¬ 
porations a dollar a piece for the privilege of making speeches on one of the 
Detroit bills? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Did this ever happen with any one in connec¬ 
tion with the Saginaw charter bill? 

A. No, sir; not that I remember of. 

Q. Was any person from Saginaw ever asked to contribute anything for the 
purchase of cigars for the committee on municipal corporations? 

A. Not that I have any recollection of. 

Mr. Dodge—Has any one ever claimed that they did. 

A. I don^t know whether you claimed it or not. I would like to make a 
statement right here. This system of assessments originated with the mem¬ 
bers of the committee in this way : When we organized we agreed that if any 
member was late in his attendance upon the meetings of the committee he 
should pay a fine. I think I was the first one that paid the fine, i think 
every member of the committee has paid a fine. The committee consists of 
seven. There are only four who smoke, but that money has usually been 
spent for cigars for the four who smoke, and from assessing the fine upon the 
members of the committee it extended in its playful way to the members of 
the House. I have a distinct recollection of our friend from Lenawee con¬ 
tributing a dollar. I think our friend from Bay and also our friend from Ing¬ 
ham contributed a dollar for cigars as a sort of a fine, and I think one or two 
delegations from outside. Further than that I have no recollection of any¬ 
thing being paid to the committee. 

The Speaker—The following question is asked : Do you know who placed 
this card in the room ? 

A. I do not; I could not say; I do not know whether it was the Speaker of 
the House or the gentleman from Ingham who is counsel for the defendant. 

Q. Was not this card more in the nature of a joke than anything else? 

A. I presume it was; that is the way it was loooked upon by the members 
of the committee. 

By Mr. Dodge. 

Q. Any proceeding of that kind is not regarded as harmful or done with any 
bad intention ? 

A. We had no harmful intention when operating it among ourselves. 

Q. A party representing some interest or looking for some legislation would 
fare as well before the committee if they did not contribute cigars or money as 
though they did contribute? 

A. They usually get their share of the cigars, the delegations that con¬ 
tribute. 

Q. You do not understand the question. I mean to say that the contribut¬ 
ing of cigars or money never influenced that committee or any members of it. 

A. No. We have reported adversly on more delegations that contributed 
than we have upon those that did not contribute. 

TESTIMONY OF REPRESENTATIVE LINTON. 

Kepresentative Linton, sworn. 

Examined by Mr. Holden: 

Q- Are you the member in this House representing the city of East Saginaw? 

A. I am, sir. 

Q. You are somewhat familiar with the bill to revise and amend the charter 
of the city of Saginaw are you? 


143 


A. I am. 

Q. I presume you were watchins; that measure somewhat? 

A. Somewhat. 

Q. And there was also pending before this House at the same time a bill to 
amend the charter of the city of East Saginaw was there not? 

A. There was. 

Q. And you had that bill in charge? 

A. I had. 

Q. You were looking to the interests of that also? 

A. I was. 

Q. Did you have a conference with Mayor Shackelton of the city of Saginaw 
relative to the Saginaw city bill? 

A. I did. 

Q. You have heard read in this House to-day a memorandum which was 
exhibited to the witness, Mr. Crowley, relative to a proposition from Shackel¬ 
ton concerning the Saginaw City charter? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you the original proposition? 

A. I think I have. 

Q. Will you produce it? 

A. I will. 

Q. What is this? 

A. That is a proposition made to me, sir, as to what Saginaw City would 
bind itself to do in the shape of improvements upon the strip of territory that 
was in dispute as between Carrolton and Saginaw City. 

Q, The strip of land known at home as the middle ground, or Florence? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was relative to taking that into the city of Saginaw under the revised 
and amended charter was proposed? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Holden—I offer this in evidence. The paper was received in evidence 
and maked exhibit D, and reads as follows: 

State of Michigan, Representative Hall, Lansing, April 18, 1887. 

Mr. Linton, Dear Sir—We agree to relund to the township of Carrolton the 
amount.ot moneys paid by them to build the piece of road across Florence, on 
Genesee street, also to extend a water main to the lower end of Florence; to 
give to said Florence three electric arm lights and proper police protection, or to 
expend ail the moneys paid into the city treasury, except State and county 
taxes Irom said territory, for the next eight years, on said piece of territory. 

J. H. SHACKELTON, 

Q. In whose handwriting is this? 

A. Mr. Shackelton’s. 

Q. Did you see the memorandum which was read when Mr. Crowley was upon 
the stand this morning? 

A. Yes, sir, 1 saw it when it was presented this morning. 

Q. I see in this that there were some lead pencil interlineations. Will you 
examine the exhibit which was produced when Mr. Crowley was upon the stand 
and say in whose handwriting the ink portion of it? 

A. According to the best of my judgment it is in Mayor Shackelton’s hand¬ 
writing. 

Q. In whose handwriting are the lead pencil corrections? 

A. In mine. 

Q. When did you make them? 


144 


A. On Monday evening the 18th of this month. 

Q. At whose request did you make the interlineations? 

A. I made them upon my own motion at that time. I thought it was proper. 

Q. Who was present at that time^ 

A. There was present at that time Mr. Fellows, Mr. Dakin and Mr. Shack- 
elton. I remember no others. 

Q. You remember that Mr. Fellows was here in the interest of the Saginaw 
city charter and in the interest of the middle ground, as you understood at the 
time? 

A. I supposed that to be the case. 

Q. After making the interlineations or corrections so that it would be a copy 
of the original proposition of the mayor of Saginaw to you, to whom did you 
give it? 

A. I think I returned it to Mayor Shackelton. 

Q. Is it a fact that on the* 18th or 19th you and Mayor Shackelton returned 
from Lansing to your respective cities? 

A. On the 19th we did so. 

Q. In the morning? 

A. In the morning. 

Q. At what time did the train depart? 

A. 8 :20 I think is the hour? 

A. For what purpose did you go? 

A. I went for the purpose of laying the proposition that Mayor Shackelton 
had made before the parties interested in this strip of territory known as 
Florence. I can continue the statement if you wish. 

Q. If you desire you may make any statement in connection with the matter 
that you may see fit, so far as we are concerned. I hope there will be no ob¬ 
jection from the other side. I presume there will be none. 

A. I desire to explain my position in this way: I came from East Saginaw 
on Monday, the 18th, and on the train, for the first time, met Mr. Shackelton. 
After the session of the House of Representatives bn Monday evening, we 
talked this matter over of the annexation of Florence. I stated to Mayor 
Shackelton—before I say that I will state that ^he Mayor, Representative 
Dakin, and other Saginaw City gentlemen thought that I had no right to in¬ 
terfere in this matter. I said to them that I had for the reason that I consid¬ 
ered it an injustice to the township, and from the fact that a number of cit¬ 
izens of the city which I repr-esent were property holders in that township. I 
also stated to the mayor that I believed the sole object of Saginaw City in ac¬ 
quiring this strip of territory was for the purpose of deriving revenue there¬ 
from without giving any corresponding benefit, and in talking this matter over 
Mayor Shackelton said in effect, that Saginaw City would agree to place upon 
that strip of ground certain improvements. I asked him to put his proposi¬ 
tion in writing. 

He hesitated somewhat saying that perhaps he was exceeding his authority 
in doing so, but after thinking it over awhile he said he would put the propo¬ 
sition in writing, but that he would not sign it until after he had talked it 
over with some of his people in Saginaw City, to see whether they would sus¬ 
tain the course that he had taken. I said very well then we wouid go to Sag¬ 
inaw in the morning. He then made this proposition in writing, afterwards 
made what I see to be a copy of it and addressed it to myself, and with that 
understanding that we should go to Saginaw in the morning we separated and 
met at the train, went to Saginaw, and after reaching his city he talked the 


145 


matter over with controller Binder and some other citizens of that city and 
then signed his name, the signature being made in Saginaw Oitv. VVe came 
back upon the train that night without having accomplished anything relative 
to the matter in dispute. That is all that I know about this matter. 

Q. Until this matter which is now being investigated arose was not Mr. 
Dakin’s character for honesty and sobriety good so far as you know? 

A. So far as I know, yes, sir. 

Q. Never heard aught to the contrary did you? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. He never has made any proposition to you nor to any member in your 
presence for the purpose of corrupting or unduly influencing you in any 
way? 

A. No, sir; he has not. 

TESTIMONY OP ANTHONY BYRNE. 

Anthony Byrne, a witness called on behalf of the respondent, being|duly 
sworn testifled as follows: 

Examined by Mr. Dodge. 

Q. Where do you reside? 

A. Saginaw City. 

Q. How long have you lived there? 

A. About 23 years. 

Q. What is your business? 

A. I am in the grocery business at present. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mayor Shackelton? 

A. I am. 

^ Q. Did he take you up to Mr. Dakin’s house with reference to this subject 
of legislation in the interest of the Saginaw City charter? 

A. He took me up there to see Mr. Dakin. 

Q. Will you please state what there is about it, about your going up there? 

A. We saw Mr. Dakin. They first commenced talking about a railroad belt 
running through the city, and they had no outlet for water except they had 
a piece of Oarrolton that runs between the river and Saginaw City. Mr. 
Shackelton asked Mr. Dakin what he thought about it and if he needed any 
help in Lansing to help get that charter bill through to get the piece of 
ground. Mr. Dakin said he thought he could use some help, and he was asked 
whom he thought would be best to take down to Lansing to help him get this 
charter bill through. Mr. Dakin replied if he had ex-Cover nor Jerome, 
Giles E. Eellows and yourself, Mr. Shackelton, I think it will be all right and 
think we can get it through.” 

Q. Did Mr. Shackelton repeatedly insist to Mr. Dakin upon this occasion 
that they must have the territory of Florence annexed. 

Objected to as leading. 

Q. Go on and state it all? 

A. Then Mr. Shackelton spoke and said, I suppose it will take some 
money to get this through.” Mr. Dakin said he thought it would. Mr. 
Shackelton said, I have not got any money of my own, but if the old con¬ 
troller Dickson were there I could get some; but as it is with Binder there I 
don’t know how it will be.” 

Q. Was anything said at that time as to what this money should be used 

for? 


19 


146 


A. No, sir; only for expenses. 

Q. Was anything said by Mayor Shackelton to Mr, Dakin about this terri¬ 
tory of Florence being annexed? 

A. Yes sir; he said if that piece could be annexed it would give them a 
good drainage for the water to go out from Saginaw to the river. 

Q. What reply did Mr. Dakin make to Mr. Shackelton when he was talk¬ 
ing about annexing the territory of Florence? 

A. I cannot recollect the reply. 

Q. Proceed and state all that you can state that took place that you can 
recollect ? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I rise to make an objection, that the whole 
of this testimony is incompetent, for the reason that he is detailing a con¬ 
versation between Mr. Dakin, Mr. Shackelton, and the witness, and Mr. 
Shackelton has not been put upon the stand previously, and the witness they 
are examining for the first time, and on their own behalf it is not contradict¬ 
ing anything that has been previously said, and is in no way material to this 
issue. 

Mr. Dodge—I do not imagine that my friend’s objection needs any reply 
from me. It would seem to me that there can be no question but what this 
is eminently proper testimony to produce here. 

The Speaker—The witness may answer the question. 

Q. What reply did Mr. Dakin make to Mr. Shackelton when he was talk¬ 
ing about annexing the territory of Florence. 

A. I don’t know that I can recall any reply. 

Q. Is that all the conversation you heard that day. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Please relate it. 

A. They talked that if they had that territory they could run a railroad 
belt through that way, through the back part of the city, and what a good 
thing it would be for the city if they could get it. 

Q. Is there anything more in that connection that you heard between these 
parties ? 

A. I don’t remember of any more. 

Q. And this conversation that you have related took place on Sunday pro¬ 
ceeding the 19th of April ? 

A. On the 16th of April or the 17th, don’t remember which. 

Q. I understood you to say that Mr. Shackelton came to you and took you 
up to Mr. Dakin’s house? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he take you to meet any other member who was finally appointed on 
that committee ? 

A. We drove from Mr. Dakin’s house to Mr. Fellows’. Mr. Fellows was 
not at home. We met him afterwards on the street. 

Q. And there did you have a talk with him regarding his going down to 
Lansing. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State what that conversation was between Mr. Shackelton and Mr. Fel¬ 
lows ? 

A. We met Mr. Fellows and Shackelton said, ‘‘Well, Mr. Fellows, I guess 
you will have to go to Lansing to-morrow.” Mr. Fellows said, “ What for?” 
Mr. Shackelton replied, “ We want you down there in the interest of this 


147 


charter bill.” Mr. Fellows said, I have no money. I have spent thirty or 
forty dollars of my own money before, and I do not propose to spend any 
more of it.” 

Q. What reply, if any, did Mr. Shackelton make to that statement? 

A. Mr. Shackelton said, I have no money either, but if Dickson or the 
old controller were there I think I could get some; but as Mr. Binder is there 
now I do not know whether I can or not.” 

Q. What else was stated between those parties at that time ? 

A. He presumed he could make arrangements so that he could have some 
money. 

Q. What else, if anything ? 

A, He said he had been talking this matter over with Mr. Dakin and Mr. 
Dakin told him he thought that ex-Governor Jerome and he would be good men 
to takedown to Lansing and he proposed to have them go down. He said ‘^Mr. 
Jerome is well acquainted at Lansing, knows most of the representatives 
and he is a Kepublioan and he can state about this charter bill to them, and 
that Mr. Fellows was a member of the G. A. R. Post and he could probably 
talk with them and state to them the condition of the bill and see if they 
could not have it passed; and Mr. Shackleton was mayor of the city and he 
could probably influence the Democrats. 

Q. That was substantially all that was said between Mr. Fellows and Mr. 
Shackleton? 

A. About all I remember. 

Q. Did Mr. Fellows, before you separated, consent to go down to Lansing ? 

A. I think he said he would go down in the evening. 

Q. You say you have known Mr. Dakin how many years? 

A. I should judge 6 or 8 years. 

Q, What is his general reputation in the neighborhood where he resides 
for truth and veracity? 

A. It is good. 

Q. Did you ever hear it breathed or intimated that Mr. Dakin was any¬ 
thing but a straightforward, scrupulously upright citizen? 

A. I have not. 

Q. Is this the flrst intimation or insinuation that you have ever heard 
against Mr. Dakin’s character and reputation? 

A. It is. 

Q. Was it distinctly understood at the time you were at Dakin’s house that 
if any money was used or raised or sent down that it must be simply for 
social purposes and nothing else? 

A. I understood the money was to be used for expenses. 

CROSS-EXAMIN'ATION BY ME. CONDUCTOE HEEEINGTOM. 

Q. You say that Mr. Shackelton spoke and said it would be necessary to 
take some money down to get this charter through? 

A. To take some money down for expenses, 

Q. Is that what you said when you first made the statement? 

^ Mr. Dodge—The record will show. 

The Speaker—Answer the question. 

A. It is. 

Q. Did you not use this language, “ Mr. Shackelton spoke and said it 
would be necessary to take some money down to get this charter through, but 
I have no money of my own.” Are not those your exact words? 


148 


A. They are. 

Q. Did you make a true statement when you stated those words ? 

A. I think I did. 

Q. Why do you now say that he said Take money for expenses? ” 

A. That is what I supposed it was. 

Q. Then the expenses are what you supposed, and not what he said ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

TESTIM02^-Y OF REPKESENTATIVE GREEN". 

Kepresentative James A. Green, being duly sworn, testified as follows: 
Examined by Mr. Dodge: 

Q. You are a member of the House of Kepresentatives ? 

A. I am. 

Q. Where do you reside? 

A. Bay City. 

Q. How long have you lived in Bay City? 

A. Six years. 

Q. Where did you formerly reside before you took up your residence at 
Bay City ? 

A. I think I lived eight years in this strip of territory that there has been 
so much talk about, in Florence. 

Q. And you have lived in the Saginaw Valley about how many years ? 

A. I have lived in the Saginaw Valley 18 or 19 years, I think. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Frederic L. Eaton ? 

A. I am. 

Q. How long have you known him ? 

A. I think 15 or 18 years, p 

Q. When were you first in oduced to him ? 

A. I never had an introduction to him in my life. 

Q. Did you hear Mr. Eaton testify that he was introduced to you by Senator 
Wisner or somebody else down at the Eichle Hotel, and that he met you 
there and there formed your acquaintance ? 

A. I don’t remember the language he used. 

Q. Were you introduced to him in the Eichle House this last winter? 

A. I will make this statement and you can call it what you please: I 
stepped up to him and shook hands and said, ^‘This is Mr. Eaton,” and he 
said, This is Mr. Green,” and that is all there was of it. That is my rec¬ 
ollection of it. 

Q. You never was introduced by any outsider ? 

A. Not that I recollect of. 

Q. You would remember it? 

A. I should think so. 

Q. You have been on speaking terms and acquainted with him for upwards 
of 15 years? 

A. I should think it was about that lengtn of time. I think it is as long 
ago as that since I first got acquainted with him. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. CONDUCTOR DIEKEMA. 

Q. If you had been acquainted with him for fifteen or sixteen years, why 
did you say, ‘^This is Mr. Eaton?” 

A. I think it has been some eight, possibly ten years since I had seen him 
before. 


Q. Then you recognized him, and not he you? 

A. Well, it seemed to be mutual, both about the same time. 

Q. DidnT you tell him that your name was Green? 

A. I think he said, This is Green,’’ and I said, ^^This is Mr. Eaton.” 
Mr. Dodge—You approached each other and he said, ‘‘This is Mr. Green,” 
and you said, “This is Mr. Eaton?” 

A. Yes, sir; I had met just at that time some other Saginaw Oity men. 

TESTIMONY OF JAMES H. SHACKLETON. 

John H. Shackelton, being duly sworn, testified as follows: 

Examined by Mr. Holden. 

Q. Are you the present mayor of Saginaw City? 

A. I am. 

Q. Did you hold a city office during the two years last preceding? 

A. I held a city office one year. 

Q. What was it? 

A. Alderman from the Fifth Ward. 

Q. Then when you were elected mayor this spring, your office as alderman 
had not yet expired? 

A. No, sir; I resigned that. 

Q. I suppose you are acquainted with Frederic L. Eaton? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And Mr. Dakin? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And the other witnesses that have been sworn residing in Saginaw Oity? 
A. Yes; all of them I believe. 

Q. How long have you lived there? 

A. Going on seven years. 

Q. In what business are you engaged? 

A. In the fiouring mill business. 

Q. How long have you been engaged in that business? 

A. About fifteen or sixteen years. 

Q. Where before going to Saginaw ? 

A. At Farmington, Oakland county. 

Q. How many times did you come down here while you were serving as 
alderman, in regard to the Saginaw Oity charter bill? 

A. Twice, I should think. 

Q. And you have also come down here since then? 

A. I have been down once since. 

Q. On what day did you come down since you were mayor? 

A. A week ago last Monday evening. 

Q. Was that on the 18th? 

A. I believe it was. 

Q. Did you return the same night? 

A. No, sir; the next morning. 

Mr. Bates moved the suspension of rule I, regarding the House adjourn¬ 
ing at six o’clock, in order that the examination of the witness might be 
proceeded with. 

Wffiich after discussion was withdrawn. 

On motion of Mr. Simpson, 

The House adjourned. 


150 


Lansing, Thursday, April 28, 1887. 

The House met pursuant to adjournment, and was called to order by the 
Speaker. 

Prayer by Eev. Mr. Oallen. 

Poll called: quorum present. 

The House resumed the investigation of the charges against Representative 
Dakin. 

The Speaker—Counsel on behalf of the accused will proceed with the ex¬ 
amination of their witnesses. 

John H. Shackleton recalled. 

Examined by Mr. Holden. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin at any time solicit or endeavor to procure any money 
from you? 

A. No, sir. 

CEOSS-EXAMINATIOK BY MB. HERRINGTON'. 

Q. How long have you lived in Saginaw? 

A. Between six and seven years—six years anyway. 

Q. You were an alderman of Saginaw last year? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you are the present mayor of Saginaw? 

A, Yes, sir. 

Q. Elected at the last election? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you first come to Lansing in regard to this Saginaw charter? 
A, I think it was about the 16th or 17th of March. 

Q. Where did you stop? 

A. At the Eichele House. 

Q. When did you next come? 

A. It was about four or five days after that—the 24th or 25th. 

Q. Where did you stop at that time? 

A. At the Eichele House. 

Q. When did you come again? 

A. A week ago last Monday evening. 

Q. And where did you stop upon that occasion? 

A. In the same place. 

Q. Mr. Dakin was stopping at the Eichele House during all those visits of 
yours here? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You say you came Monday evening? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who came with you? 

A. I don’t think there was anyone from Saginaw. 

Q. Did you see Mr. Dakin that night? 

A. I met Mr. Dakin in his seat here I think. 

Q. Did you have any talk with Mr. Dakin on Monday evening with refer¬ 
ence to the Saginaw charter? 

A. Yes, I talked with him a few minates. 


151 


Q. What was the conversation which passed between you and Mr. Dakin 
on Monday evening with reference to the Saginaw charter? 

A. I don’t know but we talked very much. I asked him how everything 
, looked. I don’t just recollect what answer he made me. We talked perhaps 
five minutes, and Mr. Linton came to me in the hall. 

Q. Were you talking about the Saginaw charter during that five minutes? 

A. I could not say now what we were talking about, I know the charter was 
mentioned. 

Q. When you first asked him how it was getting along what was his reply? 

A. I think he told me we would have a hearing the next day. 

Q. Is that all that you remember that was said with reference to the char¬ 
ter ? 

A. I think that is all I have a recollection of now. 

Q. Did you not say you were going to compromise with Mr. Linton so that 
this trouble would be ended and the bill would go through without any oppo¬ 
sition ? 

A. No, sir, not until I had talked with Mr. Linton; Mr. Linton was the 
first man that approached me upon the subject. 

Q. Did you not on Monday evening state that to Mr. Dakin ? 

A. After the House adjourned I walked out into the hall and started to 
go to the hotel, and Mr. Linton came to me and says the- 

Q. I don’t care for that; I ask you if on Monday evening you did not 
state to Mr. Dakin that it was best to compromise the matter and settle it 
up and have no more trouble about it ? 

A. I know nothing about compromising it. 

Q. On Monday evening? 

A. Not until after I had talked here, after I had talked with Mr. Linton, 

• he was the first man to talk compromise. 

Q. After you had talked with Mr. Linton did you have any talk with Mr. 
Dakin on Monday evening? 

“"A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you say to Mr. Dakin, after talking with Mr. Linton, that you 
thought it would be best to settle the matter by a compromise? 

A. I think I did. 

Q. And have no further opposition to the bill ? 

A. I think I did. 

Q. What did Dakin reply to that? 

A. He thought it would be a good plan. 

Q. Did you have any further talk with Dakin on Monday evening with 
reference to the charter? 

A. Not that I recollect of in particular. There was something said about 
it once or twice in the presence of Mr. Linton. 

Q. You and Mr. Linton came to an agreement on Monday evening, as I un¬ 
derstand it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you see Mr. Dakin on Tuesday morning? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. At what time? 

A. About 7 o’clock. 

Q. Where? 

A. At the hotel, and from there up to the railroad station. 

Q. You went back to Saginaw on Tuesday morning? 


152 


A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Mr. Linton went with you? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who walked with you to that train? 

A. Mr. Dakin and Mr. Fellows. 

Q. Now will you state to the House all that was said between Mr. Dakin, Mr^ 
Fellows and yourself while walking to the train on Tuesday morning? 

A. I don’t know, we talked about a good many different things. 

Q. I mean in relation to the charter ? 

A. I don’t think there was anything said about the charter until we got 
pretty near to the depot. Mr. Fellows spoke about being out of money, or some¬ 
thing to that effect. I asked him if he did not get some money at Saginaw. 
He said no. He said I have got sixty or seventy cents to pay my hotel bill 
and my car fare home.” I said ‘‘You are in bad shape,” and I put my hand 
in my pocket, took a bill out, $5, and gave it to him. I had |2 in my hand 
and I said “ Here, Mr. Dakin, the Saginaw men have had a good deal of fun 
out of this charter business and you have not had even a glass of beer. You 
take this and buy yourself some cigars.” I think those were the words I used» 
Mr. Dakin said “ I don’t smoke now,” and offered to hand it back. I said 
take it and buy some beer with it then.” He put it in his pocket and walked 
on to the depot. 

Q. Why did you say “You have not even had a glass of beer—take it and 
buy cigars with it.” 

A. I don’t know. It came into my mind at that time and I don’t recollect- 
that there was anything more said about it. 

Q. If he had not had any beer, why did you say buy cigars ? 

A. I said buy cigars first. He said he did not smoke any. 

Q. You wish to correct your statement that you made a moment ago ? 

A. I said it just as it took place there. 

Q. Will you please give us word for word that conversation as near as you 
can? 

A. I have already given it to you. 

Q. You do mean to say that you gave it as it occurred word for word? 

A. I think so. 

Q. Who first brought up the subject of money? 

A. I could not say as to that. I think it was Mr. Fellows who spoke about- 
being out of money. 

Q. Did you first mention the subject of money ? 

A. I think not. 

Q. You are sure of that? 

A. Pretty sure of it. 

Q. You don’t know whether it was Dakin or Fellows that first mentioned it? 

A. Dakin has never mentioned money to me that I know of. 

Q. Then it was Fellows? 

A. It might have been me or it might have been Fellows. I could not swear 
positively which one it was. 

Q. Did you not say a moment ago that you were sure it was not you? 

A. To the best of my recollection I think Fellows spoke about being out of 
money. 

Q. Did you not say that you were sure you did not first mention the subject 
of money ? 


153 


A. I am sure of that now. 

Q. You are sure that you did not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You are sure that Mr. Fellows was the man who first mentioned the 
subject of money? 

A. I am pretty sure. 

Q. Did you hear Mr. Fellows’testimony yesterday? 

A. I heard a part of it. 

Q. Mr. Fellows testified as follows: '^On Tuesday morning when we were 
going to the train Mr. Shackleton asked me if I got any money when I left 
Saginaw. I told him no, and I put my hand in my pocket, pulled perhaps 
fifty or sixty cents out and said, that is the extent of my pile.” Is that testi¬ 
mony true or false? 

Mr. Holden—I object for this reason. We have had occasion to refer to 
rule 6 governing the proceedings here, which says that the evidence shall be 
offered and received as in a court of justice, and no lawyer upon this floor 
will contend for one moment that a question of this kind is proper to be 
answered. It is for this House, after they have heard all the evidence in the 
case, to say which of the statements by the various witnesses are true and 
which are false. It is highly improper and would not be tolerated even in a 
justice court for one moment. It is competent for them to call the witness’ 
attention to a given point and ask him what he said upon the subject; and I 
call the attention of the Speaker and of the members of this honorable body 
to the fact that this is not cross-examination, and I insist that the objection 
made should be sustained. It is highly improper and incompetent in the 
form in which it is put to the witness. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—The gentleman says there is no lawyer upon 
this floor who does not know that his position is correct. He stated that 
once yesterday, and then in a few minutes afterwards stated that when the 
Speaker ruled against him he was right, so that I hardly know whether he is 
sincere in what he says or not. He further says that this is not cross-exam¬ 
ination. He asked of this witness whether Mr. Dakin ever had any talk with 
him about money, or asked him for any money. I am now trying to show 
what was said between Mr. Dakin, Mr. Fellows and the witness with refer¬ 
ence to money. 

Mr. Holden—If I maybe permitted to reply briefly I will say this in answer 
to the gentleman, that when the Speaker has ruled I trust that I am sufficient 
gentleman and sufficient of a lawyer to recognize that I am bound by the rul¬ 
ing, and to accept it as the law governing this case, and in the instance 
referred to I simply asked the gentleman to conform to the ruling which he 
had asked the Speaker of this House to establish in that respect. I will abide 
by the decisions; but I simply ask a decision upon this point of law, which is 
understood, I believe, by every lawyer upon this floor, that it is for the jury to 
determine the truth of the statement of any witness, and not for one of the 
witnesses to sit in judgment upon the testimony of another witness. That is 
my point. 

The Speaker—Answer the question. 

A. Well, I don’t know that I can answer that positively. We were walking 
along in a hurry to catch the train and I paid no attention to ^hat was said by 
either party. All that I recollect is about handing the money to Fellows and 
Dakin. 

Q. You don’t recollect any conversation that occurred in reference to it? 

20 


A. I know we talked about it for two or three minutes. I wouldn’t swear 
positively whether he approached the subject first or I did. 

Q. You now say you cannot say positively who did first mention the subject? 

A. I would not swear positively because he might have mentioned it or I 
might have mentioned it. I could not say as to that. 

Q. Did you not a few momens ago testify that you were positive that Fel¬ 
lows mentioned the subject first? 

A. It is my opinion he did, but I would not be positive that he did. 

Mr. Dodge—I object to that method of proceeding. Didn’t you testify 
that Fellows did so and so,” the record evidence is the best evidence of 
it. I submit it is not fair to the witness. 

The Speaker—Answer the question. 

Q. You cannot say whether you took out $5 and handed it to him without 
being asked for it or not? 

A. I think he said like this: have got to have some money to pay my 

expenses while I am here, my hotel bill and car fare,” and then I gave him 
$5 at that time. 

Q. Did Fellows ask you for the money ? 

A. I think he did. 

Q. What did he say when he asked you for it ? 

A. All he said was, ^^My hotel bill is to pay and my car fare home.” 

Q. Were you putting up for his expenses here ? 

A. I considered it as a loan because I had no money—it was nobody else’s 
money only my own, and I think 1 made the remark that he would pay it back 
‘‘when you get something from your orip,” or something like that. 

Q. Are you sure that you said to him than he could pay it back to you ? 

A. I think I am. That is the way I understood it, that he was to pay it 
back again. 

Q. I did not ask you how you understood it, I asked you if you are sure that 
you said to him that he could pay it back to you when he got some money out 
of his trip. 

A. I don’t know what was said in regard to that. 

Q You will not state that you made that statement to him ? 

A. There was something said about “ I can hand it back to you when I get 
home,” or something like that. 

Q. Who said that ? 

A. Mr. Fellows. 

Q. Give his language as near as possible. 

A. When I handed him five dollars I think he said, “When I get my 

money I will hand it back to you,” or something to that effect. I would 

not swear positively what it was, but I know he mentioned about paying it 
back. 

Q. Had he asked you to loan him five dollars? 

A. No; he asked me to let him have some money, what I could, to pay his 

hotel bill, or something like that. 

Q. What words were used ? 

A. He says, “ I am strapped and I have got no money, can you let me 
have have Si)me until I get home ?” 

Q. Did he say^how much he wanted ? 

A. No, sir, there was nothing said about the amount. 

Q. Did you know whether Mr. Dakin had any money with him at that 
time ? 


155 


A. No, sir, I did not. 

Q. You did not know whether he had a hundred or five hundred dollars 
Tipon his person at that time ? 

A. I didn’t know that he had a cent. 

Q. Mr. Dakin didn’t ask you for any money ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Never mentioned the subject to you at all ? 

A. Mr. Dakin did not. 

Q. And yet you took out two dollars and handed it to him without a word ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Why did you do that? 

A. I don’t know hardly why I did it. I did it, and that is about all the 
answer I can gve you. 

Q. You stated to the House committee in the judiciary last Monday that 
you loaned it to him, didn’t you ? 

Mr. Dodge—I object to that for this reason, that Mr. Shackleton, if I un¬ 
derstand his coming here correctly, was subpoenaed as a witness upon the part 
of the prosecution; he was brought before the committee, and we have no 
means of knowing what he said there, and now he is asking him questions for 
the purpose of laying the foundation for an impeachment of the man whom 
they subpoenaed here as a witness upon the part of the prosecution, and, as is 
suggested, subpoenaed him before the day that the examination was to take 
place in this House. I submit that it is not only unfair but I submit that it 
is an outrage, because these gentlemen have sat here and repeatedly said that 
these men were not subpoenaed on the part of the prosecution, and yet they 
have been before that committee and been interrogated and their statements 
taken down in writing. I submit they ought not to do this in this proceed¬ 
ing. It has been tolerated here to some extent without objection, but I sub¬ 
mit it ought to end now. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I will simply say on behalf of the committee 
that Mr. Shackleton was subpoenaed at the request of Mr. Dakin. 

The Speaker—Was Mr. Shackleton subpoenaed before this matter was de¬ 
termined to be tried before the whole House? 

Mr. Herrington—I don’t know as to that. 

Mr. Dodge—If I may be pardoned for asking a question I would like to ask 
the gentleman whether or not it was not their purpose to have Mr. Shackleton, 
Mr. Fellows and Mr. Eepresentative Green come before their committee to be 
interrogated as witnesses upon the part of the prosecution, or any one of those 
gentlemen? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I cannot say as to that. I can tell what my 
own intentions were. 

Q. Won’t the gentleman state whether or not the committee had knowledge 
of the fact that these men were to come before their committee and testify? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I hadn’t any myself. 

Mr. Dodge—Will some member of the committee please state whether the 
gentleman came before them and— 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to this. They have put this witness 
upon the stand, and if we had forethought enough to question him before¬ 
hand so as to know what he would testify, that is our good fortune; and they 
cannot now object to the cross-examination simply because we have asked 
him some questions beforehand. 

Mr. Dodge—We raise no objection to that part of this proceeding, and the 


156 


single fact of their interrogating this witness, but what we do object to is 
this parading of the fact before the members of this House, this jury that 
are sitting here in judgment upon the respondent—parading the fact that 
this man was subpoenaed here upon a telegram, and yet they have had him 
before their committee a day before this examination before the whole House, 
undertaking to find out what he knew about this case. I submit that the 
lawyer metnbers of this committee are experienced gentlemen, and they 
ought to know that this is unfair, to say the least. If they came here as our 
witnesses they had no right, in fairness and in justice, according to the prac¬ 
tice recognized in the courts, to call these witnesses before their committee 
and interrogate them as to what they knew about the facts in view of this 
proceeding. I submit it is unfair, and I submit that the Speaker is too 
much of a lawyer to tolerate it if his attention is called to it. 

The Speaker.—That part of the proceeding has already occurred. 

Mr. Dodge.—The Speaker has tolerated the doing of this one thing, there¬ 
fore we challenge attention to it that these men are being paraded before this 
House as witnesses on the part of the defense, and yet the gentlemen are going 
into an examination that they had in the private committee room that we 
know nothing about and they are proceeding upon the assumption that these 
witnesses at that time were witnesses called before their committee upon the 
part of the prosecution. 

The Speaker.—What is the question ? 

The official stenographer repeated the question as follows: Q. You stated 
to this commiftee in the judiciary room last Monday that you loaned it to 
him, didn’t you ? 

The Speaker.—Answer the question. 

A. No, sir, I did not consider that it was a loan. 

Q. I did not ask you that question. I ask you if you did not so state ta 
the judiciary committee last Monday? 

A. I hardly know what I did state. 

Mr. Van Zile—I learn that the statement in the judiciary room was taken 
down. If this is to proceed in this way, I consider it is unfair. I want to go 
upon record as far as that is concerned. I submit these gentlemen ought to 
allow the privilege of seeing the statement that is in writing and not to inter¬ 
rogate the witness as to what he said. If it was taken down, let us have it. 

A. I might say this: I was asked questions by I think three different 
lawyers at the time and got considerably mixed up. 

Q. You got considerably mixed up, did you? 

A. In that way yes, sir. 

Mr. Van Zile—I understand the gentleman now refuses to allow us to see the 
statements that were made in this star chamber court of theirs in the judicary 
committee room. I want that to appear. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Q. Did you ever appear before Mr. Dodge pre¬ 
vious to the commencement of this examination? 

Mr. Dodge—That is objected to. There is no question but what he did, 
but not as a witness on the part of the prosecution. He was our witness and 
we talked to him in good faith and we call him here now in good faith. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington. I am glad to hear the gentlemen own up. He 
says these men are our witnesses, subpoenaed by us. Now he owns up that 
he was trying to tamper with one of our witnesses, according to his own state¬ 
ment. 

The Speaker—The witness will answer the question. 


157 


I he question was repeated by the official stenographer as follows: Q. Did 
you ever appear before Mr. Dodge previous to ihe commencement of this ex¬ 
amination. 

A. I did, for perhaps five minutes. 

Q. Did you ever appear before Mr. Holden previous to the commencement 
of this examination. 

A. Mr. Holden come to my house on Sunday a few minutes. He did not 
talk any about, this matter that I know of particularly. 

Q. Didn’t talk anything about this case? 

A. Not that amounted to anything, no, sir. 

Q. What did he come there for ? 

A. Well, I don’t know, as I could hardly tell vou. 

Q. Didn’t he come there to see you about this matter ? 

A. Well, he called on me and we talked— 

Q. Didn’t he come there to see y.>u about this matter? 

A. Well, I think, perhaps he did. 

Q. And yet he did not talk to you about it ? 

A. Well, we talked about different things while he was there. 

Q. You stated a few minutes ago that he did not say anything to you much 
about this case particularly, is that true ? 

A. Well, I don’t recollect now just what he did talk on. 

Q You recollect that he came there to see you about this case ? 

A. I know he was in my house on Sunday afternoon about fifteen minutes, 
perhaps twenty minutes. 

Q. And yet he did not say anything about this case that you can now 
remember? 

A. No, sir, I don’t recollect of anything that was said in regard to it. 

Q. You don’t recollect that anything was said in regard to it? 

A. I think Mr. Holden made a remark like this: He said ^^The only 
thing I can do is plead for mercy in this matter.” That was about the only 
thing that I recollect that took place. 

Q. To return to this conversation on the way to the train—we have got past 
this liftle tempest in a teapot—what did you say to Mr. Dakin when you 
handed him this $2? 

A. I said Take it and buy some beer with it.” First I said to buy cigars 
with it, and then I said ‘^Buy some beer with it,” after he said he did not 
smoke. 

Q. Give us the language as nearly as you can just as it occurred. 

A. To the best of my recollection now I handed him the $2 and I said 

Here Dakin, the Saginaw boys have had a good deal of fun over this charter 
and spent some money, and I don’t believe you have had hardly a glass of 
beer out of it. You take this $2 and buy some cigars with it.” I think that 
was the language I used. He said he did not smoke and offered to hand it 
back. I said “Take it and buy s mie beer with it.” Those were the words. 

Q. What was your purpose in giving him the !fi52 ? AVas it not to infiuence 
his action in regard to the Saginaw charter bill ? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Van Zile—That is objected to; it is in variance to the rule that the 
Speaker has laid down to state what was said and what was done, not 
what his intention might have been. Supposing his intention was to cor¬ 
rupt the Legislature, can you convict Mr. Dakin by this man’s intention, 
or could you even compel him to answer the question? 


158 


The Speaker—Let the witness state what was said, what took place there. 

A. I think Mr. Dakin put the money in his pocket and we walked on to 
the train. 

Q. Was anything said about your loaning it to him ? 

A. No, sir, I guess not about the $2; I don’t think so. 

Q. You stated Monday afternoon that you loaned it to him, did you not ? 

A. Well, I think there was something said about that, hut come to think it 
over I am pretty sure that I gave it to him right out. I am certain of it. 

Q. Did you state to the committee when 6rst asked why you gave that to 
Dakin, that you loaned it to him. You did so state did you or not ? 

A. I know I made a remark to pay it back when he got to Saginaw. 

Q. No, no. I ask you if you did not state to the committee last Monday 
afternoon when they first asked you what you gave this money to Dakin for, 
that you loaned it to him. 

Mr. Dodge—That is objected to for the same reason before stated. 

The Speaker—Let the witness answer the question. 

The official stenographer repeated the question as follows: 1 ask you if 

you did not state to the committee last Monday afternoon when they first 
asked you what you gave this money to Dakin for, that you loaned it to him?”" 

A. Yes, sir, I think I did. 

Q. You were mistaken about it then ? 

A. 1 was not under oath then. I am now. 

Q. Do you mean to say you will tell an untruth when not under oath and 
tell the truth when you are under oath ? 

A. No, sir. I say when I was in that committee room there were three 
lawyersall asking questions at once. 

Q. All at the same time ? 

A. AVell, they were all talking pretty near all the time. 

Q. Did not one ask you questions and the others write down your answers ? 

A. Part of the time they did, and part of the time all three of them talked 
if I recollect right, 

Q. Did they intimidate you in any way? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Were they ungentlemanly in any way? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. They treated you fairly in every way, didn’t they? 

A. In every way; yes, sir. 

Q. You were not excited? 

A. No, sir; not that I recollect of now. 

Q. Was any undue advantage taken of you whereby you were induced to 
tell an untruth? 

A. No, sir; not a particle. 

Q. You had a conversation at Dakin’s house on the 16th or 17th, when Mr. 
Anthony Byrne was present, did you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was with reference to the Saginaw charter bill? 

A. Yes, sir, that was part of it. 

Q. You there stated that it would be necessary to take some money down 
to get this charter bill through, did you not? 

A. I don’t think I did. 

Q. Then Mr. Byrne’s statement that Mr. Shackleton spoke and said it 


159 


would be necessary to take some money down to get this charter through 
was not correct. You did not make any such statement? 

A. I don’t recollect making any such statement now. 

Q. Can you say positively that you did not make this statement, that it 
would be necessary to take some money down to get this charter through, but 
that you had no money of your own. 

A. I don’t think there was anything mentioned about money at Dakin’s. 
When we got to Fellows’ there was. I have no recollection of money being 
mentioned at Dakin’s house. 

Q. Did you use that language at Byrne’s house? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Then you never used that language at any place? 

A. I think that language was used at Fellows’when we met Fellows -m the. 
street. 

Q. Did you say to Fellows that it would be necessary to take some moneys 
down to get this charter bill through? 

A. No, sir. Mr. Fellows stated that he had no money and I told him that, 
if Dickson was controller we could get some money for his expenses, but as 
Binder was controller now I did not know whether we could or not. 

Q. I ask you if you ever stated to any person that it would be necessary to- 
take some money down to get the charter through but that you had no money 
of your own? 

A. No, sir, I never did. 

Q. Did any telegrams pass between you and Mr. Dakin or Mr. Fellows on 
Tuesday of last week? 

A. JNo, sir. I sent a telegram to Crowley about 7 o’clock on Tuesday 
morning saying: 

Q. I don’t care for that. I ask you if you sent a telegram either to Mr. 
Dakin or to Mr. Fellows? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did they send any to you? 

A. Not that I ever received. 

Q. Did you promise to bring back money to Mr. Fellows or to Mr. Dakin 
on Tuesday night? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you promise that in case you did not come back you would tele¬ 
graph them so that they could get money in that way? 

A. They asked me to, but I never made them any reply, because in the first 
place I did not know where I could get any money, and in the second place I 
did not think it was necessary, for we had everything all compromised and 
settled. 

Q. Then you did not say to Mr. Fellows, after you handed him the $5, ‘^1 
will bring some more when I come?” 

A. I have no recollection of saying that. 

Q. Did Mr. Fellows then ask you if you would be back that night, Tuesday 
night? 

A. I don’t know that he ever mentioned it at all. 

Q. And did you reply don’t know?” 

A. The undertanding was that we were to come. 

Q. Answer the question. 

A. I don’t recollect making him any such promise. 

Q. ^‘But you thought you would.” Did you say that? 


160 


A. We expected to be back that night, yes, sir. 

Q. Did you say to Mr. Fellows that you thought you would be back that 
night? 

A. I think we made the remark that we would be back either that night or 
the next morning. 

Q. Did you also say If anything happens that I don’t come I will tele¬ 
graph you so that you can get some money by telegraph ? ” 

A. No, sir; I never mentioned money by telegraph in any shape. 

Q. You never made that statement in any shape or form ? 

A. No, sir; because I did not know where I could get any money and did not 
think we wanted it. 

Q. Dakin and Fellows met you at the depot when you came back on Tues¬ 
day night, did they not ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. About a half a mile from this building right down this street ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What time was that ? 

A. About nine o’clock I should think the train got in. 

Q. About 9 o’clock at night ? 

A. Possibly a little later. 

Q. They then asked you if you had brought some money, did they not ? 

A. I think not. 

Q. What did they come down there for ? 

A. Well, they came down I suppose to see how we had fixed the matter up 
at Saginaw. I don’t know of anything else. 

Q. There was nothing said about what they came down for ? 

A. Not that I recollect of. 

Q. What conversation did you have down there ? Was there nothing said 
about this matter at all? 

A. We talked about what people thought of the proposition at Saginaw, 
and I don’t recollect whether we came up on the street car or whether walked 
up. I could not say now. 

Q. Did not Fellows ask you if you brought some money back? 

A. I think not. 

Q. Will you swear positively that he did not? 

A. Yes, sir, I think I would swear positively. I am quite sure that Mr. 
Fellows never mentioned money that night. 

Q. You say you think you will? Will you? 

A. Well, I would not, because I don’t know. There were four or five of 
us walking along together and talking about different things. He might have 
remarked that or might not. I would not swear positively that he did and I 
would not swear positively that he did not. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin ask you anything about whether you brought any money 
back with you? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was any talk had about money that evening? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Any talk about money the next morning? 

A. Mr. Fellows made the remark, I think it was the night before, that 
some money might be used to treat the boys with to pretty good effect, just 
like that. 

Q. That was on Monday night before you went back to Saginaw? 


161 


A. I think that was down here when we were together. 

Q. Who was present? 

A. Dakin, Linton, Fellows and myself. 

Q. Give us his language as nearly as you can. 

A. That is just about the sum and substance of it, about all there was to it. 

Q. Did you make any reply to that? 

A. No, sir. I did not think that was the proper way to do it. I thought 
there had been too much money spent down at Saginaw now for that kind of 
business. 

Q. With whom ? 

A. Well, different committees that went down there. 

Q. Do you mean to say that any money has been spent here among the 
members of this House ? 

A. No, sir. If I understand it right there has been a little spent down there 
in a social way. 

Q. With whom? 

Mr. Holden—That question is objected to as incompetent and immaterial. 

The Speaker—Answer the question. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I propose to show that it was not among mem¬ 
bers of this House. 

The Speaker—Answer the question. 

Mr. Holden—The witness does not claim to have knowledge. He said he had 
understood some had been used in a social way, but he does not claim to have 
knowledge in regard to it; it would be entirely hearsay. 

The Speaker—If he knows anything about it, let him tell. 

A. I don’t know anything only what I have heard in a hearsay way. That 
is the amount of it. It is immaterial anyway. 

A member—Who is to judge of that? 

Q. Did you hear that the money was spent among the members? 

Objected to as hearsay and immaterial. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington. I admit that it is hearsay, but it seems to me 
that the gentleman ought not to object to that qustion. 

The Speaker—Let him answer the question. 

Q. You did not hear that any money was spent among the members did 
you? 

A. Well, I could not say that there was any money spent—no. They took 
them around in hacks and treated them a little—took them around in car¬ 
riages. I know in the Taylor House we met a few of them and we had a social 
drink apiece. 

Q. Where was that?, 

A. At Saginaw. 

Q. That did not occur in Lansing? 

A. No. sir. 

The Speaker—Who were they? 

A. I don’t know as I could tell you. Senator O’Reilly was one of them. 

I don’t know the names of the committees that were down there. There were 
two or three committees. 

Q. Who else? 

A. I don’t know as I could tell you. 

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge that they were members of the 
House of Representatives? 

A. I know there was one or two of them were. 


162 


Q. Do you know that of your own knowledge? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who were they? 

A. Mr. Rentz was one of them. 

The Speaker—Who were the others? 

A. I cannot recollect his name now. 

Q. Who took them around in carriages? 

A. I don’t know. Mr. Barnard had one rig. I don’t recollect who drove 
the other one. It was to look over the territory of Florence. 

Q. It was to look over the territory so they could see whether it was proper 
for it to be attached to Saginaw? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was not done for the purpose of influencing votes in that way? 

A. No, sir, that was not thought of at all. 

Q. Who was the other man? 

A. I don’t know as I can tell you. 

Q. Then how do you know that he was a member of this House, if you do 
not know who he was? 

A. I saw him here lots of times, but I could not place him now. 

Q. Can you see him now? 

A. I don’t know, there are a good many faces here. No I don’t believe 
I can. 

Q. Will you say that you know that person to be a member of this house? 

A. I think I would. 

Q. Yet you do not know his name? 

A. No, sir; I have forgotten his name. 

Q. How did they happen to go up there to Saginaw? 

Judge Van Zile—I don’t want to take any of the time of the house, but I 
would like to have it go upon the record that it may be known how it is that 
we are cross-examining witnesses in this proceeding. I object to this that it 
is not proper cross-examination. Not one word was said in the direct exami- 
tion about this subject, nor is it a subject that appertains to this issue here. 
We are not trying the justice of the members, we are trying Mr. Dakin. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington.—The witness volunteered it, and then I asked 
to have him explain. 

Judge Van Zile.—That does not not make it any the more relevant. 

The Speaker.—There has been considerable testimony taken here that has 
not been relevant. What we want to get at is the facts.. 

Witness.—I believe Mr. Oviatt was one of the gentlemen. 

The Speaker.—The objection can go on the record if desired. 

Q. Did Mr. Fellows tell you at any time that he had used 130 of his own 
money ? 

A. I think when Mr. Byrne and I went to see him he made the "remark that 
he was out $30 on this charter business. 

Q. Did he say how he had spent the money ? 

A. No, sir, he did not. 

Q. Did not Mr. Fellows say to you at the time that you gave him the five 
dollars and Dakin the two dollars, “We are both strapped?” 

A. He made the remark that he was strapped. I don’t know whether he 
said Dakin was or not. 

Q. Did you not state in the committee room last Monday afternoon that 
Fellows said “ We are both strapped? ” 


163 


A. I would not swear positively whether he said both or ‘‘We are strapped.’^ 

Q. I ask you if you did not state in the committee room last Monday after¬ 
noon to the committee that Mr. Fellows said “U e are both strapped? 

A. I don’t know but I did—I think I did. I know that Fellows said like 
this, “We are strapped.” I don’t know whether he said both or not. 

Q, He said “We are strapped?” 

A. I think those were the words he used. 

Q. Did he make any statement that Dakin had used any money? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you not so state to the committee? 

A. That Dakin had used money? 

Q. That Fellows ^aid that Dakin had used money? 

A. I think not. 

Q. Will you state that you did not so state to the committee? 

A. I have no recollection of saying that now—that Dakin used money. 

Q. Used $5 or $6 of his own money when he said they were strapped? 

A. That Dakin had used some of his own money? 

Q. That Dakin had used some of his own money. 

A. I have no recollection of ever hearing it mentioned before. 

Q. I am requested to ask this question: Did Mr. Oviatt take a drink of 
liquor or smoke? 

A. I could not say as to that. There were probably twenty in the bar¬ 
room. 

Q. You cannot state that Mr. Oviatt drank any liquor? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You cannot state that Mr. Eentz drank any liquor? 

A. No; I know they were having a good, social time. 

Q. You know they were in the room, but you don’t know whether they 
took any liquor or cigars? 

A. I could not swear positively. 

A. I know I treated once, and it cost me 11.50; I know that much. 

Q. Did that $1.50 go to treat the members of this Legislature? 

A. It went to treat the whole house. 

Q. Went to treat the house. You don’t know whether the members of the 
Legislature drank anything or took any cigars? 

A. I did not stop to see. I asked everybody to have some. I don’t know 
whether they got it or not. I paid for it anyway. 

Examined by Mr. Holden: 

Q. Were you subpoenaed to appear before a special committee of the House 
previous to the day set for the examination of this case to commence in this 
hall the day previous? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Ask him if he has the subpoena. 

Mr. Holden—I will ask my own questions. 

The Speaker—His subpoena is the best evidence. 

Mr. Holden—If they are sensitive upon the point I will not press it. 

The Speaker—The following question has been sent to the Chair to be 
asked: Have you at any time during the present session of the Legislature 
heard the name of any member of the House mentioned by Mr. Dakin, or in 
his presence, in regard to the use of money in connection with any niatter of 
legislation pending in this House, other than as stated in connection with 
the fifteen members already testified to? 


164 


A. No, sir, I never have. 

Q. Have you ever heard of any money being used with those fifteen ? 

A. No, sir, in no shape, manner or form. 

M r. Holden—Or any one of them ? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Or that any could be used with them ? 

A. No, sir; unless it has been as stated here, taking them out and given 
a drink ? 

Q. Whom did you ever hear say that any of the fifteen could be taken out 
and given a drink ? 

A. I don’t recollect any of them, 

Q. Did you hear anybfdy so state? 

A. No one but Mr. Fellows. 

Q. What did he say ? 

A. He said you might take some of them out and have a social time. 

Q. Some of those fifteen ? 

A. No. 

Q. Why did you state as you did ^ 

A. I mis-spoke myself in regard to the fifteen. 

Q. Yon never heard him say that those fifteen could be taken out? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you have a talk at the Eichle House on Tuesday night with Mr. 
Eaton and Mr. Tillotson about money? 

A. Not about money. 

Q. Did you have a talk with them there at all? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you not say that Dakin wanted you to bring or telegraph money, 
but when you got home you found the compromise was satisfactory and you 
did not try to secure any money? 

A. No, sir. I said Fellows had been talking about some money. 

Q. Did you say that Fellows wanted you to bring or telegraph money and 
when you got home you found that the compromise was satisfactory and you 
did not try to secure any? 

A. I don’t recollect giving him any such answer. I told him like this, 
every time they mentioned money to me I never made any reply. 

Q. You told them that every time they mentioned money to you gave them 
no reply? 

A. I think that was the answer I gave. 

Q. Why did you use the word they, if Mr. Dakin said nothing about 
money? 

A. They were always together. That was the reason I suppose. I don’t 
know what else it could have been. 

TESTIMONY OF L. M. SELLERS. 

L. M. Sellars, being duly sworn on behalf of the respondent, testified as 
follows: 

Examined by Mr. Dodge. 

Q. Where do you reside? 

A. Cedar Springs, Kent Co. 

Q. What is your business? 





165 


A. Newspaper publishing. 

Q. Four years ago you were a member of the House of Eepresentatives? 

A. I was. 

Q. Two years ago? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What office did you hold in the House two years ago? 

A. The office of Speaker tern, of the House. 

Q. Have you been here in Lansing this session of the Legislature on 
several occasions? 

A. I have. 

Q. Are you a honorary member ex-officio or do you hold any position in the 
organization known as the Third House? 

A. I did. 

Q. What is your official position, so to speak, in the Third House? 

A. I was elected speaker pro tern of the Third House at the opening of the 
body. 

Q. Who is the Speaker of the Third House? 

A. The Hon. Timothy Nester of Marquette. 

Q. During your experience of four years ago and two years as a member 
of the Legislature, was it not a very common practice to have meetings of 
the Third House in the lobby and in the postoffice department, where oranges 
and cigars were provided by men interested in legislation; for members of 
the House and those gentlemen who participated in those proceedings? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—We object to that as incompetent and imma¬ 
terial. 

The Speaker—The chair does not see any relevancy to the issue. 

Mr. Dodge—It is simply to show that oranges and cigars have for several 
sessions past of the Legislature been sent into the House of Representatives 
and into the Senate chamber, to the members, by gentlemen who are here in 
the interest of legislation, and not with the intention of corrupting any 
individual member of the Legislature generally, but simply for the purpose of 
sociability, and in the same manner that has been talked about that the money 
was to be expended if sent down from Saginaw. It is simply for the purpose 
of giving them to understand. Yesterday, if the Speaker please, we showed 
that cigars were used in one of the committee rooms. I happened to have the 
honor of being personally acquainted with the individual members of that 
committee, and I know each and every one of them to be scrupulously honest 
men, and it would seem to me if this objection is sustained it would be a 
slight reflection upon the members of that committee, and therefore we want 
to show that it is not only the general custom in the Legislature, but in the 
city of Lansing to entertain members by treating them to cigars, oranges, 
confectionery, and things of that kind, in a perfectly legitimate manner, and 
further, that entertainments have been given, we desire to show, at the 
Eichle House, at the Lansing House, and been given by the members of the 
Legislature of the present session without any evil intent or anything of that 
kind ever having been imputed to them by anyone. This is simply to show 
the general custom of the manner and the methods of conducting affairs here 
at Lansing. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—We on the part of the committee have no objec¬ 
tion to any question relative to the Third House pertaining to this session. 
There are a few of the old members belonging to this Legislature, and it is 


166 


unfair or incompetent to go beyond this Legislature. If the gentleman will 
confine it to this session we as a committee have no objection, 

Mr. Dodge—I shall be pleased to do that, only from the fact that several of 
the men numbered as of the fifteen are men of my personal acquaintance, 
and men with whom I myself have served in the Legislature. Men whose 
character and reputation is unquestioned, who have never been approached 
in any corrupt manner in the world, and I submit that they, having knowl¬ 
edge that two years ago, and four years and six years ago there was such a 
custom, if it is proper to show it in reference to this session, it is proper to 
show it two years, and even further back than that. Mr. Dakin, the 
accused, was a member two years ago. The witness was a member two years 
ago, and also my esteemed friend, Mr. Rumsey, and other men of the immor¬ 
tal fifteen, Mr. O’Keefe and others, and indeed quite a number of them; but 
they do not all occur to me at this moment. 

The Speaker—I do not think there is any necessity for that testimony. 

Mr. Dodge—Then, Mr. Speaker, since the committee consent that the 
question may pertain to this present Legislature do I understand the chair 
that he does not desire that he shall proceed with this session? 

The Speaker—The chair has no objection as to this Legislature. 

Q. During the present session of the Legislature has there been any meet¬ 
ings of the Third House in which persons in the capitol have participated? 

A. There have. 

Q. How many meetings have there been held? 

A. I could not state the number. I should state three perhaps. 

Q. And on those occasions were there various members of the House and 
Senate in attendance upon the meetings of the Third House ? 

A. There were. 

Q. Was there any confectionery or tropical fruit and cigars purchased by 
the gentlemen on that occasion ? 

A. Not to my knowledge. 

Q. Was there any money raised for any particular purpose, or assessment 
made ? 

A. There was. 

Q. For what purpose ? 

A. The matter was brought to the Third House owing to the neglect of a 
duty by the Second House here two years ago in regard to the reverend gen¬ 
tlemen who came up here and prayed for the sinners here. 

Q. The sinners that were here then? 

A. Y es. That they did not even, two years ago, give the reverend gentle¬ 
men a vote of thanks. Four years ago, I understand, they did that much for 
them. The Third House took the matter under consideration, and in order 
to raise that money, I think $100, they made an assessment at the opening of 
the Legislature on the Senatorial candidates. I think I have with me the 
resolution. 

Q. Don’t understand me as trying to inquire into the Senatorial canvass. 
We simply want to get at the fact as to whether or not money has been used. 

Mr. Manly—As one of the jurors I would like to have the very inside 
facts, and if it involved any of the Senatorial candidates we would like to 
know it. 

A. The assessment for this purpose was made as all other assessments were 
made in the Third House during this session as far as I know, and they were 


167 


made like this for the reverend gentlemen who came here every morning and 
offered prayer, to the Lyons’ sufferers, and I understand a few widows and 
orphans in the city that some wood and flour had been appropriated to, and 
I was about to state how the money was raised. The Third House passed a 
resolution to raise this money, and the mouey in the Third House has been 
raised only from candidates from the United States Senate, and State officers 
olected or holding an appointive office in the State. 

Q. You do not mean to say that the custom and practice of the Third 
House this session is any different from previous sessions, they take in every¬ 
body who has an interest in legislation and make assessments, providing they 
are brought before that honorable body? 

A. There was no gentlemen brought before that body during this session 
that had any legislation or was interested in any to my knowledge. I have 
the resolutions, and I would offer them to the clerk to read, to show what 
this money was raised for and how. 

Q. You may read it if you please? 

The clerk read as follows : 

THIRD HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, ) 

General Order No. 2. ) 

Whereas, this House is informed that several gentlemen of State and na¬ 
tional reputation are now in the city for the purpose of inducing the present 
Legislature to elect one of their number as the successor of Omar D. Conger 
in the United States Senate, and 

'Whereas, owing to the difference of opinion as to which of these gentlemen 
shall be elected, there is liable to be a protracted discussion, and possibly 
some deviations from the strict teaching of Christianity, and 

Whereas, this great State has neglected by proper enactment to provide 
pay for the reverend gentlemen who, on each morning of the session of the 
Legislature of the State of Michigan, utter words of wisdom and supplication 
for the atonement of man, therefore 

Resolved, That the flrst duty of this House shall be to provide compensa¬ 
tion for the reverend but neglected gentlemen. And be it further 

Resolved, That the gentlemen whose names have been mentioned as candi¬ 
dates for the exalted office of U,S. Senator are hereby cited to appear before 
the bar of this House, within a reasonable time, and be required to contrib¬ 
ute such sums as this body may deem just, in aid of the long neglected work¬ 
ers in the vineyard of the Lord. 

TIMOTHY HESTER, 

Speaker Third House. 

Attest: 

F. W. Phillips, 

Acting Sec^y Third House. 

L. Mo. K. SELLERS, 
Speaker pro tern. Third House. 

Q. Do you know whether or not any money has been used for the purpose 
of buying cigars for the members of the Third House or any one else? 

A. I do not. 

Q. Have cigars been provided gratuitously for members generally and for 
members of the Third House in the postoffice department? 

A. There were not at any meeting. I was at but one meeting of the Third 
House during the present session. 


168 


Q. You have only attended one meeting ? 

A. That is all. 

Q. How many meetings have there been of the Third House to your 
knowledge; is there an official record of them ? 

A. I think there is; as I understand, three. 

Q. As an officer of the Third House I would like to ask you if it is not true 
that the money usually raised by the Third House is used, in part, for not 
only the purposes you have stated but for buying cigars, and oranges and 
fruit ? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—I object to the question so far as it goes beyond 
this session, under the ruling. 

The Speaker—Confine your questions to this session. 

Q. The money that has been raised in the Third House during the present 
session is all in the hands of the treasurer, at the present time, the Post 
Mistress in the postoffice. 

Q. You don’t know of any particular use that has been made of it this 
session? 

A. Not outside of what I have stated. 

Q Have you any personal knowledge of there being in any of the com¬ 
mittee rooms any cards displayed similar to the ones stated by the Hon. Mr. 
Bates, at this session, with regard to cigars? 

A. I have not noticed any. 

Q. Were you present on the occasion when the Hon. Senator from the 32d 
district had his banquet? 

A. I was not. 

Q. Were you here at the time of the reception given by the president of 
the Senate ? 

A. I was not. 

Q. Not on either of those occasions? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You served in the Legislature two years ago with Mr. Milo H. Dakin 
from Saginaw? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You are acquainted with him? 

A. At the opening of the session two years ago first. 

Q. During your acquaintance with Milo H. Dakin have you ever heard it 
insinuated or intimated that he was anything but an honest man in his pri¬ 
vate character and in his official position here in the Legislature? 

A. I have not. 

Q. Up until the time that these charges were preferred I mean? 

A. I have not. 

cross-examination by MR. CONDUCTOR DIEKEMA. 

Q. Is the Third House composed of any of the members of the Legislature? 

A. They are honorary members as I understand it. 

Q. Do the members of the Legislature take any part in the proceedings of 
the Third House? 

A. Not to my knowledge. 

Q. I' then is composed of gentlemen from outside that are here visiting? 

A. Yes, sir. Of course the members of the present House are members 
there and enjoy the entertainment with the rest and perhaps participate, in 
a social way. In the workings of the House I do not know that they do. 



169 


Q. To your knowledge where was the money raised by the Third House 
this year used ? 

A. For the purpose stated. 

Q. Did you state the amount ? 

A. I could not give the amount at present. There was one hundred dol¬ 
lars I believe raised for the ministers here. The other amounts I could not 
give. The treasurer has it in the postoffice. I would like to state that the 
Third House gave $25 to Mr. Button of Grand Eapids, the crippled soldier 
who has a bill here in the Senate at the present time. 

Q. Was there anything appropriated for the Lyons sufferers? 

A. There was. 

Q. Do you remember the amount ? 

A. I do not. 

Ee-direct examination by Mr. Dodge: 

Q. From whom was this money raised ? Simply those interested in the 
Senatorial contest ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Outside parties ? 

A. Outside parties over the State. Mr.- 

Q. Never mind any names, but from outside parties that were present at 
the Capitol. 

A. Yes, sir. 

The Speaker read the following question: 

Q. Have you at any time during the present session of the Legislature 
heard the name of any member of the House mentioned by Mr. Dakin or in 
his presence in regard to the use of money in connection with any matter of 
legislation pending in this House other than as stated in connection with the 
fifteen members already specified, or any of the fifteen? 

A. I have not. 

Mr. Manly—I would like to ask Mr. Sellers what candidates for the United 
States Senate contributed to this fund? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—That is objected to. 

Mr. Manly—It seems to me it is a proper question. The gentleman has 
asked the question and we want the whole facts. 

The Speaker—The witness may answer the question. 

A. I could not state as to that. There was a committee appointed to wait 
upon the honorable gentlemen who were candidates, and the committee called 
on quite a number but they did not all respond, and a part did respond I am 
quite sure. I think there was about one hundred dollars raised. 

Mr. Manly—Does that paper contain the names of those who subscribed to 
this fund ? 

A. It does not. 

The Speaker—Were there any oranges or cigars purchased for the mem¬ 
bers of the present House by the Third House, to your knowledge? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Dodge—Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Speaker to reconsider 
the ruling with reference to confining the oranges and cigars to the present 
House, only for this purpose: I donT want to have it understood that we 
are undertaking to draw out that testimony for the purpose of reflecting 
upon this House, but it is simply a custom that has been in vogue here for a 
long time and carried on without any one giving any sort of attention to it 

22 


170 


or thinking there was anything wrong at all. I would like to put myself 
upon the record that I, and very many of the men here in these fifteen mem¬ 
bers of this present House, have participated in the meetings of the Third 
House. I want to say that my motive in getting this out is the best possible, 
simply to show that this is a custom and it dates back of this Legislature. 

The Speaker—The Speaker is much pleased to know that it dates back of 
this Legislature and that nothing of the kind has taken place during this 
Legislature, and is fully of the opinion that testimony of that kind should 
not be admitted. 

Mr. M anly—I would like to ask the gentleman some questions. 

The Speaker—The gentleman will remember the rule. 

The following question was read by the Speaker: 

Q. Did not Mr. A. W. Wright and Mr. Pollaskiand Dr. Langsdorf pay into 
this fund the sum of ten dollars each? 

A. !Not to my knowledge. I would state to the House that that matter,was 
before the Legislature at some session of the Third House from which I was 
absent. 

TESTIMONY OE FKANK W. PHILLIPS. 

Frank W. Phillips, being duly sworn, testified as follows: 

Examined by Mr. Dodge. 

Q. Where do you reside? 

A. Lansing at the present time. 

Q. What is your business? 

A. I am a journalist, correspondent of the press. 

Q. You correspond for several newspapers? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know about such an organization commonly called the Third 
House? 

A. Yes, I do. 

Q. Do you hold any official position in that? 

A. I am first assistant sergeant-at-arms of the Third House at the present 
time. 

Q. How long have you held that position ? 

A. Since the opening of this session of the Legislature. 

Q. Have you been in attendance upon the several meetings of the Third 
House ? 

A. Hot all of them, several of them. 

Q. You have heard the testimony of your worthy Speaker pro tern. ? 

A. I have. 

Q. Will you be kind enough to state whether or not, aside from the matter 
that he referred to, there has been any money assessed against the several 
parties visiting the capital city and used for any other purpose than that 
stated by him ? 

A. I wish you would make your question more definite. It is so indefinite 
I could not answer it under oath. 

Q. Do you know of any money being expended that was collected by the 
Third House? 

A. Yes, I do. 

Q. Please state what you know about it. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to it as incompetent and immaterial. 
If he will ask the witness if any money has been expended among the mem- 


171 


bers of this House during the present session we have no objection, but out¬ 
side of that we do object. 

The Speaker—Confine your questions to the members of this House. 

Q. I will ask you, under the ruling of the Chair, whether or not any money 
has been assessed and paid in to the Third House when members of the 
House or Senate of the present Legislature were in attendance upon your 
meeting? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to it. 

Mr. Speaker—The witness need not answer that question. 

Q. Whether or not any money has been used in purchasing oranges or 
tropical fruit or cigars and sent in to the members of the Legislature, or pro¬ 
vided for them out where the meetings are held by the Third House? 

A. Not to my knowledge, if you refer to the present session of the Legis¬ 
lature. 

Q. -You say you have not attended all of the meetings of the Third House? 

A. No, sir; I think there was one meeting which I was unable to be pres¬ 
ent at. 

Q. Do you know of any money being expended except as has been stated 
here by the Speaker vto tern., that the members of this House or the Senate 
had any knowledge of during this session of the Legislature? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—That is objected to. 

The Speaker—He need not answer the question. 

Q. Do you know whether or not there are any cards or posters in any of 
the committee rooms such as was alluded to by Mr. Bates yesterday, except 
the oiie in the room of municipal corporations, either in the House or Sen¬ 
ate? 

A. I do. 

Q. Please state where. 

A. There is one in the railroad committee room of the Senate, or was one. 

Q. How did it read ? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema.—I object to any posters or cards in the Senate 
room. The gentleman will confine himself to the House. 

Judge Van Zile.—It seems to me that the counsel upon the other side pos¬ 
sibly may misapprehend the object we have in this. It is not simply for the 
purpose of proving that these practices have been carried on in these commit¬ 
tee rooms or about the capitol, but it is simply to show that such things as 
these came to the knowledge- 

The Speaker.—The Speaker has no objection to his answering the ques¬ 
tion, but the card would be better evidence of its contents than his recollec¬ 
tion of it. 

Judge Van Zile— If there is a card in existence that would be proper. I do 
not know that these have been very carefully preserved. 

The Speaker—Being important matters I should think they would have pre¬ 
served them. 

Judge Van Zile—We are hardly willing to concede that they are very im¬ 
portant matters. All we care for is simply the effect that it might have on 
individuals who saw them and knew that this was the practice, whether there 
was any idea of sociability of that kind among the members of the House or 
here about Lansing. However, if counsel insist we will undertake to pursue 
the very formal and technical way of proving these things, by calling witnesses 
to prove the loss of the card, and if not lost, to produce them, but it will take 
considerable time. 


172 


The Speaker—To save time the chair will rule any further testimony upon 
this point will not be in order. 

Mr. Manly—Here is a question I would like to ask. 

The Speaker—Send up the question and it will be asked. 

The Speaker then read the question as follows: 

‘^Do you know of any candidate for the United States Senate paying any 
money into the Third House during this session? 

A. Of my own knowledge no, sir; I do not see them pay any money in. 

The Speaker—Are there any other questions? 

Mr. Manly—I would like to ask the gentleman if he did not see some money 
paid into the hands of the postmistress? 

A. I did not. 

By Mr. Dodge—You have been here in Lansing on several occasions when 
the Legislature has been in session? 

A. Yes, sir, this is my fifth consecutive session. 

Q. Were you present here two years ago during the entire session nearly 
or a large portion of the session of the Legislature? 

A. No, sir, I was not. I was not here over one-third of the session 
probably. 

Q. A large portion? 

A. Not over one-third of the time. 

Q. During that time did you frequently see the respondent here in the 
House ? 

A. Yes, sir, I saw him ; knew him by sight only. 

Q. Did you become personally acquainted with him? 

A. I did not. 

Q. When did you first, if ever, become acquainted with him? 

A. I have only a casual acquaintance with him at the present time, a bare 
speaking acquaintance. 

Q. During the time that you have known Mr. Dakin personally and by rep¬ 
utation, have you ever heard from him directly or indirectly that a niembe 
of the Legislature of the present session could be approached corruptly or wit 
any improper motive or purpose in view? 

A. I never did; certainly no . 

Q. What do you understand from the general report, if )mu have any un¬ 
derstanding, is the opinion of the members of the Legislature here about Mr. 
Dakin’s reputation for truth and veracity? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—That question is objected to. 

Q. What was it previous to the time that these charges were preferred 
against him? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—I object to that. 

The Speaker—He need not answer that. 

Mr. Dodge—As Judge Van Zile stated, the purpose of this testimony with 
regard to these cards is not to reflect on any member of this House, and in* 
deed the contrary idea or object is constantly in our minds. We do not 
want to have it understood that these cards were used anywhere or at any 
time, either in the House or in the Senate or rooms with anything bordering 
on an improper purpose, and if the Speaker please, the reason why I desire 
to go back of this session was simply to show that those were the things that 
had been up and become a part of the custom and habits and ways of con¬ 
ducting matters around the halls of legislation, and that it is not for a cor¬ 
rupt design or purpose, and I submit that the Speaker ought to permit us to 


173 


go into these facts briefly. I think there are a number of members of the 
House here who would like to know something about the origin or at least the 
continuance of that practice. 

The Speaker—The chair does not. The Speaker thinks it should have been 
abolished long ago. 

Mr. Dodge—That is undoubtedly the opinion of the Speaker, but undoubt¬ 
edly that is not the idea. The purpose is to get at the fact that these things 
have existed, whether good, or bad, or indifferent, or whether they ever had 
any effect in the world in the legislation either in the House or Senate. 
That is the idea, and it must be that you misapprehend our motive or in¬ 
tention in wishing to introduce this testimony. I do not doubt that there is 
a member of this House but that regrets that there has ever been such a 
practice, but they have gotten into the habit thoughtlessly and unconsciously 
without any intention of doing wrong, or allowing themselves in any way to 
become influenced by these things. 

The Speaker.—The chair will maintain its position in regard to the further 
introduction of that class of testimony. 

The Speaker then announced in accordance with the rule, that the House 
would stand at recess until 2 o’clock p. m. 


AFTERNOON SESSION. 

2 o'clock P\ M. 

The House met and was called to order by the Speaker. 

Roll called: quorum present. 

The House resumed the investigation of the charges against Rep: esenf ative 
Dakin. 

TESTIMONY OF HON. MILO H. DAKIN, RESPONDENT. 

Milo H. Dakin, respondent, being duly sworn, testified as fcllovs: 
Examined by Mr. Holden. 

Q. What is your age? 

A. Thirty-eight years. 

Q. Where were you born? 

A. In this county. 

Q. Lived here until about what year? 

A. I lived here until about 1863. 

Q. Where then did you go? 

A. I went into the army. 

Q. What company and regiment? 

A. Company 0, 9th Michigan cavalry. 

Q. What army? 

A. Sherman’s army. 

Q. What campaign? 

A. The campaign to the sea. 

Q. "" From Atlanta to the sea,” as the song goes. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When were you discharged from the army ? 



174 


A. At the close of the war, 1865. 

Q. Did you receive an honorable discharge ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In what army engagements did you take part ? 

A. The seige of Atlanta, the capture of Savannah and the reduction of 
Charleston and Columbia, South Carolina, Ealiegh, North Carolina, all the 
way through. 

Q. All of the principal engagements of that famous campaign ? 

A. Yes, sir. I was on escort duty part of the time. 

Q. Previous to enlistment in the army what had been your business ? 

A. Working on the farm. 

Q. After you had returned frym the army where did you reside? 

A. I resided in Jackson county. 

Q. Engaged in what business? 

A. Farming. 

Q. Where next after that? 

A. Ionia county. 

Q. In what business? 

A. Farming. 

Q. Where from there? 

A. Montcalm county. 

Q. In the same business? 

A. Milling. 

Q. Where did you go from there? 

A. I went from there to Saginaw. 

Q. And have lived there ever since? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In what year did you go to Saginaw? 

A. About 8 years ago. 

Q. In what business have been engaged there? 

A. Milling. 

Q. In what particular capacity? 

A. Drag sawing, packing and inspecting. 

Q. Shingles or lumber? 

A. Shingles. 

Q. What was your age when you went into the army? 

A. 15 years. 

Q. Have you been to school since you returned from the army? 

A. I went to school about two months. 

-Q. At what place ? 

A. In this county. 

<Q. What positions of honor and trust have you held? 

A. Member of the Legislature, also treasurer of the State Assembly of the 
Knights of Labor of Michigan. 

Q. When were you chosen to that responsible and honorable positon ? 

A. Over a year ago. 

Q. Do you now hold it ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What other positions of trust, if any ? 

A. Nothing only an officer in the Local to which I belong. 

Q. Have you been master and treasurer of your local ? 

A. Yes, sir. 


175 


Q. Both ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you now ? 

A. Treasurer now. 

Q. When were you elected to this Legislature first ? 

A. Two years ago last fall. 

Q. Who was your competitor ? 

A. John Backus. 

Q. Was he also your employer ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Who was your predecessor in this House ? 

A. The Hon. Newell Barnard. 

< 3 . You were re-elected again at the last general election, were you? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. By an increased majority or otherwise? 

A. Virtually, yes. 

Q. Who was your competitor in the last election? « 

A. A gentleman by the name of Levi Tillotson. 

-Q. The gentleman who has testified in this matter? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you a family? 

A. ,Yes, sir. 

< 3 . Consisting of what? 

A. Two children. 

Q. Is your wife living? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And they reside in Saginaw? 

A. One of my children resides in this county now on a farm. 

Q. What age is the child that is in this county? 

A. He is past eighteen years. 

Q. The other is at home with its mother? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is the age of that child? 

A. Thirteen years past. 

Q. Your district, I believe, consists of the city of Saginaw, the township 
of Carrolton and the township of Zilwaukee. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And did during the first term ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know Frederic L. Eaton ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And the other witnesses from Saginaw who have been sworn ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long have you known Mr. Eaton ? 

A. Probably five or six years. 

Q. I don’t care to go into details concerning the amendment of the charter 
of Saginaw, for I do not care whether it was amended or not, but is it a fact 
that the bill has been pending here concerning it for some time ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And that it is true, as stated by the various witnesses, that citizens of 
Saginaw have frequentl been here in regard to the measure? 

A. Yes, sir. 


176 


Q. Do you know who was the city attorney of Saginaw for the year last 
past previous to recently? 

A. Mr. Frederic L. Eaton. 

Q. Who is his successor? 

A. Mr. Frank Etnerick. 

Q. Eecently appointed? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you know of the fact of Mayor Hill of Saginaw nominating for re- 
election Frederic L. Eaton? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. AVill you state to this House whether you were favorable to his re-elec¬ 
tion ? 

A. I was not. 

Q. Alderman Fellows was then a member of the council ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And as you understand voted against him ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Mayor Shackelton was then an alderman and also voted against his con¬ 
firmation ? 

A. I believe so. 

Q. And the nomination was rejected ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. iVlr. Eaton continued to hold until the election of Shackleton as mayor ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And Mr. Shackleton as mayor did not present his name to the new coun¬ 
cil for the position ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Eaton felt in any way unkind towards you from 
any interest you may have taken in his defeat for the position ? 

A. I have met him a great many times on the street and he would not look 
at me nor speak to me. He lives in the same ward as me, and I opposed him 
for election as supervisor five or six years ago and helped defeat him. 

Q. This bill that is pending at this time concerning the charter was favored 
by you, or otherwise, in the present form ? 

A. In its present form as it is now I favor it. 

Q. Did you understand that Mr. Eaton also favored it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The differences then cqncerning views in regard to the charter or char¬ 
ters of the city of Saginaw had been healed between yourself and Mr. Eaton? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And each favor the passage of the bill as it now is? 

A. As far as I know, yes, sir. 

Q. And the large number of lobbyists who came here in the interest of the 
bill from Saginaw city as you understand also favored it? 

A. Yes, sir, as far as I know. 

Q. There was no particular disagreement in regard to it? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. It is a fact that the bill was antagonized in some of its features by the 
representative from East Saginaw, was it not, in its present form? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State whether you labored as a member upon this floor to harmonize the 


177 


differences of opinion between the East Saginaw representative and the mem¬ 
bers in interest concerning your own charter. 

A. Yes, sir; the member from East Saginaw and I conferred together a 
great deal on our charter. 

Q. With a view of coming to some conclusion that was honorable and sat¬ 
isfactory to both? 

A. Always that way. 

Q. And never with any other view? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. After Mr. Eaton’s successor had been chosen and the differences of 
opinion between yourself and Mr. Eaton in regard to the pending charter had 
been harmonized, state whether there seemed to he any change in Mr. Eaton 
toward you, in the way of recognition or friendliness, or otherwise. 

A. Well, whether the charter as fixed suited him entirely or not I don’t 
know, but he appeared friendly. 

Q. Since then state whether he has been accustomed to recognize you when 
he has met you ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And has appeared friendly until this matter arose ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now you remember meeting him on the 19th of this month in Lansing? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you first meet him, according to your present recollection, on 
that day? 

A. Down on the next floor below this. 

Q. I call your attention now to a statement, which was given in evidence 
as having been made and subscribed by yourself in the presence of 15 of the 
members of this House, and his Honor the Speaker, and Mr. Eaton, in some 
committee room, wherein it appears I believe—taken in the form it was— 
that you did not see Mr. Eaton at that time. 

A. I saw him at that place. 

Q. And did you mean that the committee should understand at the time 
that you did not see him ? 

A. I do not understand your question. 

Q. Did you mean that the committee should understand that you did not 
see him at that place; that is did you intend to deny to them that you had 
seen him there ? 

A. In the committee room ? 

Q. No. 

A. Down below? 

Q. Yes. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you conscious that the statement appeared in that way when you 
signed it ? 

A. I was not. 

Q It then was a fact that you did meet him in the corridor below and have 
a talk with him in the morning? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you have never consciously stated to the contrary? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or meant so to state? 

A. No, sir. 


178 


Q. What was the conversation that you had with him there at that time? 
I do not expect you can give the exact words, but if you can do so, do it, and 
if you cannot remember the exact words give us the substance and purport 
of it as fully and completely as it is possible for you to do. 

A. He and Smith met us in the corridor. He said to Fellows, What is 
the outlook of our charter?’’ Fellows said, First rate.” Then he said, 

Where is Mr, Shackleton.” And I answered that he had gone back to 
Saginaw with Mr. Linton to help fix this trouble np between the two cities 
and to get some money, as he came down without any—to get some money as 
he came down without any. That is the talk I had with him there. 

Q. Mr. Linton, who had previously opposed your bill—I understand this 
was your bill, was it ? 

A. No, sir, this is the amended bill—amended by the bill that I introduced. 

Q. Well, the same thing practically. You had charge of it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Mr. Linton having previously opposed the measure, and having gone 
with Mayor Shackelton of your city back to Saginaw, did not expect that a 
meeting of the committee would be had that day? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. In their absence? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you remember whether you so stated to Mr. Eaton? 

A. I think I told him that there would be no meeting that day. I think 
Idid. 

Q. I understand from the other witnesses that a meeting had been pre¬ 
viously set for that afternoon? 

A. That is what I understood, yes, sir. 

Q. Did you see a memorandum or proposition—afterwards a proposition— 
by Mayor Shackelton in regard to the matter? 

A. Idid. 

Q. Before or after he went to Saginaw with Mr. Linton ? 

A. Before. 

Q. Who had it ? 

A. I think I had it in my hands myself and I saw it in Mr. Linton’s hands 
and in Mr. Shakelton’s hands. 

Q. And Mr. Fellows’ ? 

A. I am not sure whether I saw it in Mr. Fellows’ hands or not. 

Q. Well, it was with reference to fixing up the difference that existed in 
the opinion of Mr. Linton and Mr. Shackelton that they went to Saginaw ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The memorandum containing the purport of it as you supposed ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That was understood by you as the reason why they were going there? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did they go in the morning or in the afternoon? 

A. They went in the morning. 

Q. And when did Mr. Linton return, as you now remember? 

A. I think he returned the same night, if I remember right. 

Q. In the meantime Mr. Eaton came, did he? 

A. I did not see him. 

Q. AVell, going back a little: After you had the talk with Mr. Eaton in the 
corridor below where did you go? 


179 


A. I went down on the corner of the street below here. I don’t know the 
name of the street. 

Q. Who was with you ? 

A. Mr. Fellows. 

Q, And he was here in the interest of the charter ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. As you had understood had been sent by the common council of the 
city? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or by whom ? 

A. By the mayor. 

Q. Had he previously been here by direction of the council as you under¬ 
stood ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. But at this particular time was here by the direction of the mayor of the 
city? 

A Yes, sir. 

Q. How did you come to that understanding? 

A. I recommended him to the mayor to be appointed to come here in the 
interest of the charter. 

Q. And who else did you recommend should come? 

A. Ex-Gov. Jerome and the mayor also. 

Q. Did you understand why the ex-governor did not come? 

A. I could not state only from hearsay. 

Q. I ask if you heard why he did not come? 

A. I heard it was because he was sick or something of that kind. 

Q. Ill and unable to come? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you see Mr. Eaton again? 

A. I saw him on the opposite corner of the street, on the main street b e- 
low here. 

Q. That is down town ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Down by the bank ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who was with him ? 

A. There was no one with him. He came there and met Mr. Fellows and 
Mr. Crowley and me. 

Q. And entered into conversation ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State whether he appeared friendly or unfriendly that morning ? 

A. Friendly, sir. 

Q. As much so as any gentleman. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Had you any unfriendly feeling toward him at that time ? 

A. Not any. 

Q. Did you suppose that he at that time entertained any unfriendly fealing 
toward you ? 

A. I don’t think I did. 

Q. I suppose you entered into conversation concerning the charter ? 

A, Yes, sir. 

Q. And you went into the Windsor, as stated by the others ? 


180 


A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Sat down there ? 

A. Yes, sir. • 

Q. You took some sour wine? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And the other gentlemen did not take sour wine? 

A. It did not look like sour wine. 

Q. How came you to go into the Windsor at that time? 

A. By invitation of Mr. Eaton. 

Q. And the talk was had there? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now from the time you met on the corner, give me what was said as 
you now remember it. 

A. As 1 remember it he said Well, Mr. Fellows, Shackleton didn’t bring 
you any money ?” and Mr. Fellows said ‘‘No.” Well,” he said, ^‘Do you 
think that money could be used here to further the interests of our charter? 
or words to that effect, and I think before there was any answer made he said 

Well, now, let’s go somewhere and sit down and talk this thing over.” So 
we went down to the Windsor restrurant, and we all took seats in one of tho 
stalls. Mr. Crowley called on the drinks, and after we had drank Mr. Eaton 
pulled out a roll call out of his pocket. ‘‘Now,” he says “Dakin, those 
friends that you would like to have a good time with, just tell me who they 
are.” I think I named over one or two names to him verbally. “ Well,” he 
says, “To get at this better take your pencil and check them off.” I took a 
pencil and checked them off. 

Q. Do you remember whose pencil? 

A. I think it was my own. 

Q. He asked you to check them ? 

A. Yes, sir. Now he says, “To get at the exact amount which you think 
will be necessary to see these men or to go around with them, set down about 
what you think it would take, about what the amount would be.” Previously 
he asked me what it would cost. I told him that I had no idea. Then he 
asked me to set down the amount. 

Q. What did he say in regard to the amount? 

A. He says, “ So that we can get at some exact figure so that we will know 
about what to do.” So I had in my mind an idea of about what expense it 
would be to have a time with the boys- 

Q. In a social way, you mean? 

A. Yes, sir; and I sat down the amount so that it would tally very nearly 
with my judgment. 

Q. Previous to his asking you to put down those figures you had, at his re¬ 
quest, checked certain names upon the list? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now which members did he wish the figures set opposite ? 

A. He left that to my own discretion. 

Q. What was said, if anything, in regard to putting figures down by those 
that had been checked by you or otherwise ? 

A. He says, “put down the figures by those that you have checked,” or 
“ those that you have checked set down the figures to,” or something of 
that kind. 

Q. Previous to the agreement between yourself and the gentlemen from 


181 


Saginaw having the charter interest at stake, had there been a difference of 
opinion between you and Eaton ? 

A. In regard to the charter ? 

Q. Yes. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And that had all been harmonized before this, as you understood it ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now, as between Eaton and yourself, which one suggested the raising 
of any funds for a good time in a social way ? 

A. As between Eaton and myself ? 

Q. Yes. That is, suggested the use of mone}’’ in a social way. 

A. Mr. Eaton. 

Q. Now, but for his request that you check opposite the names of members 
upon the roll call which he furnished you, would you have done any check¬ 
ing ? 

A. If he hadnT requested me to? 

Q. Yes. 

A. Oh, no. 

Q. Did any one else urge you to check them ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And at that time you checked them nothing had been said about put¬ 
ting down figures opposite the names ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. If Eaton had not requested you to put the figures down opposite those 
names would you have done so? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Had you any intention of doing so until urged by him? 

A. No, sir; I never thought of it. 

Q. Did you intend in any way to raise a fund with which to corrupt these 
members or any of them? 

A. To corrupt them? 

Q. Yes. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you believe that any of those members or others of this honorable 
body were corruptible? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Had you ever approached in any manner any member of this House 
with a proposition tending in any way to corrupt him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or to ascertain if he could be corrupted? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. I presume without a doubt that no one has ever approached you? 

A. Never. 

Q. It appears in evidence that ordinarily you are a temperate man. Is 
this true? 

A. I am not a drinking man. 

Q. How was it on that morning that these Saginaw friends came down, 
.had you drank any? 

A. I think I had drank twice before they came. 

Q. That is, before you met Mr. Crowley? 

A. Yes, before I met Crowley or Eaton. 

Q. And then, before going into the Windsor, you drank, as I understand, 


182 


from Mr. Crowley—once with him? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And then you drank with Eaton in the Windsor at the time he urged 
you to put down the figures, and that was the fourth drink you had had that 
morning? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was that a usual or unusual occurrence for you? 

A. Very unusual. 1 might tell that the first drink I took was down here 
in a drug store where Mr. Fellows and I went. We both took quinine. 

Q. Quinine and whiskey? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is a remedy in our vicinity for ague and biliousness? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What time a-day was that as near as you can remember? 

A. I should say it was about 8 o’clock. 

Q. And that was taken by you for medicinal purposes? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You are not accustomed to drink whiskey? 

A. No, sir, I never touch it. 

Q. When you do drink what are you in the habit of drinking? 

A. Once in a great while I take a glass of beer, and most of the time I drink 
ginger ale or pop, and once in a great while I drink what they call here sour 
wine. 

Q. When you took the second drink that morning what did you take ? 

A. I think I took a glass of beer. 

Q. And the third drink was taken with Mr. Crowley ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did you drink then? 

A. Sour wine. 

Q. There were three drinks that were not of a kind? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And the fourth drink appears in evidence to have been sour wine? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And the fourth drink was about what time of day ? 

A. I should say it was about half past eleven. 

Q. Four drinks in two hours and a half, which you say was unusual. Com¬ 
ing back to the time when Eaton urged you to check the names of the mem¬ 
bers and put down figures opposite, you may give me in detail, so well as you 
can the number now, what was said between you four gentlemen there in the 
stall at that time ? 

A. Mr. Eaton says: ^^Mr. Dakin,” he says, You think you can use this- 
money amongst the members of the House?” Isays, In a sociable way, 
yes.” And I says, I don’t want the money. You give the money to Mr. Fel¬ 
lows, and Mr. Fellows being with me and will be with me, if there is any 
expenses made Mr. Fellows will pay for it, and then I will be left out.” 

Q. What else? 

A. Mr. Eaton was looking down the roll call, he says ^^Here is one man,. 
Mr. Rumsey, you have got $25.” Mr. Crowley speaks up in a laughing way, 
he says '‘Oh, yes, I know Mr. Rumsey, he is a pretty good man.” That is 
all there was said upon that question. That is about all that occurred in there 
in regard to these matters, that is, that is all that I can think of just now. 


183 


Q. After Eaton had got you to put down these figures what did he do with 
the roll call and the figures? 

A. I picked up the roll call and put it in my pocket and we got up ta 
leave. Mr. Crowley, I think, went out ahead and Mr. Fellows next and I 
was next and Mr. Eaton last. He kind of looked around on the table and 
he says, ‘‘Where is that roll call?” Isays, “I have got it in my pocket. 
He says, “Let me take it.” So I handed it over to him and he put it in his 
pocket. “Now,” he says, “We will see about this money affair and fix it up.” 

Q. You seemed to be doing about whatever he said that morning ? 

A. Pretty much. 

Q. After he talked with you in this way and made the suggestions that he 
did will you tell us in what way you expected the money would be expended ? 

A. About that time I think there was something said about dinner and we 
got up and went out and Mr. Crowley and Mr. Eaton went one way and Mr. 
Fellows and I went down to the Eichle House. 

Q. That is where you board ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And did board two years ago ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Go on. 

A. We went in there and went towards the back end of the hall and Mr. 
Fellows says: “Dakin, what is the matter with you? Isays, “Nothing I 
guess.” He says, “You act to me as though you were either crazy or drunk. 

I says, “I don’t think I am either.” Isays, “Why?” He says, “ Don’t 
you know you should not have given that roll call to Mr. Eaton?” Isays 
“Why?” He says, “It was not the proper thing to do. You know that 
Eaton don’t like you and he will have it against you.” I says, “ I ain’t afraid 
of that,” I says, “I don’t think there is any danger upon that ground.” 
Then we went down to dinner, came up from dinner and sat down, and Mr. 
Fellows says, “Now, Dakin,” he says, “ If we get this money—” in the first 
place I have answered your questions, but I could tell other things that come 
in connection with this. If you wish, I could explain it. 

Q. The House are anxious to hear it, and I don’t wish you to keep back 
anything, but let them know it all. 

A. The first time we met Mr. Eaton here on the corner Mr. Eaton says,. 
“ Mr. Shackleton didn’t bring you any money—didn’t bring up any money 
with him.” Mr. Fellows says “No.” Mr. Eaton then turned to me and says,. 
“ Dakin, do you think you can use some money here ?” I says, “ Yes, cer¬ 
tainly, in a social way.” He says, “Mr. Crowley”—we hadn’t seen Mr. 
Crowley then—he says, “ Mr. Crowley and Mr. Little is here and I have got 
some money of my own, and Mr. Crowley and Mr. Little is here and I will go 
and see them and see what we can do.” So, going back to the time that we 
came up from dinner, Mr. Fellows says, “ Dakin, what kind of a scheme 
would it be to get the dining room here and have a dance and feast if we get 
this money? ” I says, “ It would be a good thing.” That was my way partly 
towards the expending of this money. 

Q And how else? 

A. Another way, if I should happen to meet a man or get a few of them 
together and we would happen to be out at night, then I would spend the^ 
money that way. 

Q. In keeping up your end of the sociability? 

A. Yes, sir. 


184 


Q. Was it yonr intention to corrupt or attempt to corrupt any of the honor¬ 
able members of this House? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you think they could be corrupted by any such sums, or any other 
sums on earth ? 

A. No, I think they are higher priced than that. 

Q. Do you mean by that to insinuate that they are persons of any price at 
all? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You never have believed that? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you think there would be any harm in having a little banquet at 
the Eichele House ? 

A. If I had I should not have seconded the proposition of Mr. Fellows. 

Q. Why did you think there would be no harm ? 

A. I thought there would be no harm because the same thing had been 
done in Lansing this winter before as I have understood it. 

Q. Where? At Eichele’s ? 

A. No, sir, at the Lansing or some of the hotels here. I believe Mr. 
Hubbell had an entertainment down here. 

Q. And you wanted to have the same sort of an entertainment on a smaller 
scale ? 

A. On a little smaller scale, yes. 

Q. And you meant no more harm by it than Senator Hubble did. 

A. No, I didn’t intend any harm. 

Q. Doubtless the Hon. Senator did not ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Before this had you seen some of these placards about ? 

A. Of what ? 

Q. Before this had you seen some of these placards in the commmittee 
rooms of which we have heard something on this investigation ? 

A. I think I saw one up in the room where the committe on municipal 
corporations meets. 

Q. The one that has been testified to by Mr. Bates? 

A. I think it is the one, 

Q. Do you know of any other reason than because Eaton urged you to put 
down those figures why you put them down ? 

A. No, sir. When I wrote the figures I shoved the list back to him, and 
he said, ^‘This will go no further.” 

Q. What other reason or motive prompted you to make the figures that 
you did make, other than Eaton himself by his solicitation and urging? 

A. No other reason. 

Q. State whether at that time you intended that those gentlemen present 
should understand that any of those gentlemen, in your judgment, could be 
influenced or corrupted in the least by the use of money ? 

A. I said they could not. 

Q. I think it appears in Mr. Eaton’s statement or letter to the Honorable 
Speaker of this House that you said, in conversation with him at the time, 
that the money would not be used in any way to corrupt members. Was that 
statement in effect made by you ? 

A. Yes, sir. 


185 


Q. Then Eaton was correct in that you think ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you first begin to realize that you possibly had done wrong in 
making the figures ? 

A. When Mr. Fellows spoke to me about it. 

Q. What did you do then ? 

A. I thought about it a great deal then, and after we came up from din¬ 
ner and had sat down a few minutes we went out on the street and took a 
walk around the street, I think probably went a block or two blocks, I forget 
exactly, and then we met Mr. Tillotson, on the same corner or opposite cor¬ 
ner from where we met Mr. Eaton and Mr. Crowley, and about the first 
thing I said to Mr. Tillotson was to explain to him what I had done in regard 
to the roll call. He said ^^Dakin, you have done wrong, you know that Mr. 
Eaton is not your friend and he will use it against you.’’ I said ‘^Mr. Tillot¬ 
son, will you go and see Mr. Eaton and ask him to see the roll call, and if you 
get it put it in your pocket?” He said I don’t know where he is.” I said 
^^He is probably at the Hudson House;” so he said‘T will do so,” and he 
turned and went up towards the Hudson house. 

Q. If I remember rightly Mr. Tillotson, in giving his version of the mat¬ 
ter stated at the time he met you there, he invited you to take a drink with 
him and you declined to drink. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That was the first time you had seen Tillotson that day ? 

A. I think that was the first time. 

Q. Do you remember the circumstance of his asking you to indulge? 

A. I don’t remember that. 

Q. In any event you did not take a drink with Tillotson at the time? 

A. Not that I remember of. 

Q. He said he would get the roll-call if he could, and left and went in the 
direction in which you told him he could probably find Eaton ? 

A. Yes, sir. He said, If I get hold of it I will keep it.” 

Q. You regarded Tillotson as your friend at the time? 

A. I did, or I would not have said what I did. 

Q. As soon as you met him you expressed your alarm at what Eaton had 
done in the matter? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember any further conversation later in the day with either 
Crowley, Tillotson, or Eaton in regaid to it ? 

A. I don’t remember now that I do. 

Q. When was your attention next called to the transaction? 

A. When Speaker Markey came to my seat and asked me to see him in his 
room. 

Q. Did he tell you why he wished to see you there ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you accompany him ? 

A. I did. 

Q. Was the House at that time in session? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Transacting the ordinary business of the body? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When you arrived in the Speaker’s room, you found these several gen¬ 
tlemen present whose names had been checked ? 

24 


186 


A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And who else ? 

A. Mr. Eaton and Mr. Markey. 

Q. You were interrogated there in regard to it ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And did you have any hesitation in telling those gentlemen your version 
of it ? 

A. I don’t think I had. 

Q. You made the statement that has been given in evidence here as having 
been signed by you ? 

A. As far as I can remember, yes. 

Q. Do you remember what persons interrogated you there, the answers ta 
which interrogations were taken down in narrative form and signed ? 

A. I think Mr. tlerrington and Mr. Diekema and Mr. Markey and Mr. 
Manly I believe, Mr. O’Keefe I think, and Mr. Eaton. 

Q. Give us your judgment as to the length of time you were in the room 
with those gentlemen at that time. 

A. I have no idea. 

Q. So far as the statement goes is it substantially correct, with the one ex¬ 
ception which you have mentioned, wherein it seems to appear in the state¬ 
ment that you did not meet Mr. Eaton in the lower corridor in the morning. 
Of course it is not full and in detail, but such as does appear is it substantially 
correct, with that one exception ? 

A. As near as I can remember, it is. 

Q. Was there anything in connection with the transaction which at that 
time you sought to keep back or evade? 

A. No, sir; not that I remember of. 

Q. Was there anything in the transaction from the first to the present time 
that you have wished or in any way sought to withhold from any member of 
this House? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you at any time solicit money from Eaton? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you at any time solicit money from Shackelton? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. It is a fact, is it, that he handed you a two-dollar bill? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. At the time stated by himself? 

A. Yes. sir; substantially the same. 

Q. Tell us in your own way just as it was, when and where, what was said 
as near as you can remember and all about it. 

A. On Tuesday morning we were going to the train. Mr. Fellows and I 
accompanied Mr. Shackleton to the train. On the way there he handed 
something to Mr. Fellows. Mr. Fellows took it and put it in his pocket. I 
do not know what it was—the amount. He says, “^Mr. Fellows, here is some 
money.” What the amount was I do nor. know. Mr. Fellows took it and 
put it in his pocket, and he says, ^^Here Dakin, here is two dollars,” and I 
took it, not thinking what he meant by it. I said, What is this for? He 
said, "" Thai is something to buy cigars with.” "T said “I do not smoke,” and 
I handed it back to him. He said, “ Keep it and put it in your pocket and 
buy some beer with it.” I said, I do not drink beer.” He said, Keep it 


187 


anyway.’’ He would not take it back, and I was not going to throw it upon 
the ground. 

Q. Hid you suppose at the time that the mayor intended in any way to cor¬ 
rupt you with that two dollars ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What did you do with it ? 

A. I put it in my pocket. 

Q. Have you got it yet or have you spent it ? 

A. I’ve got it. 

Q. Let us see it. 

Witness Reduces the bill and handed it to counsel. 

Q. This is the same bill, is it ? 

A. The identical bill. 

Q. A two-dollar United States Treasury note or greenback ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Holden.—I do not propose to offer this in evidence and have it marked 
as an exhibit and file it with the clerk. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington.—You might hand it back to Mayor Shakelton. 

Mr. Dakin—He gave it to me. 

Q. At the time he handed you the two dollars was there any disagreement 
between you and the mayor in regard to the bill? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You coincided in regard to it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then it was not necessary in any way, either by the use of two dollars or 
other money, or by argument or otherwise to convert you to his views con¬ 
cerning the bill? 

A. No, sir, because I had a hand in fixing up the matter as they were. 

Q. And you and the mayor were entirely agreed to it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State whether you believed that the honorable gentleman who had op¬ 
posed it heretofore was agreeable to the form of the bill as you and the mayor 
understood it should be? 

A. As far as I know, yes. 

Q. So that the opposition of Mr. Linton you believed to be at an end? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There is a considerable volume of the statements of Mr. Eaton to this 
House, and I desire to make reference in interrogating you to the record or 
his evidence, first asking you if you have now stated substantially as fully as 
you can remember at this time, your conversations with Mr. Eaton upon the 
points in interest in this matter? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Coming now to the time when you met Mr. Smith and Mr. Eaton in 
the lower corridor of this building, did you state to Eaton in substance of 
effect that you expected Mr. Shackleton to come down here and bring some 
money to put the bill through the House? 

A.. Not put the bill through the House, but in the interest of the charter. 

Q. You said nothing about the use of money in putting the bill through 
the House ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he ask you what you wanted of money, or whether there were any 
expenses to pay ? 


188 


/> 


A. I don’t remember whether he did or not. 

Q. Did you say anything to him in regard to asking if there were any ex¬ 
penses to pay, “ yes, you know what I mean, we have got to have money to 
put this through with?” 

A. I did not say any such thing. 

Q. And did he ask you if you meant to say that you had got to use money 
with the committee ? 

A. No, sir, I never heard the word about the committee. 

Q. And did you tell him ^^No, that you thought the committees were all 
right but we have got to use some money among the members?” 

A. I never heard of that until I heard it from him. 

Q. And did he ask you in substance Do you think that the passage of 
measures can be promoted among the members of this House by the use of 
money,” and did you say to him ^^Of course it can?” 

A. I dbn’t think I said any such thing. 

Q. Was there any conversation of like import there between you and him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you think that money could be used? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And afterwards did he ask you ‘^1 would like to have you tell me, Mr. 
Dakin, definitely, what you regard it necessary to do in regard to our bill ? ” 
and did you answer, As I told you before we never can get that bill through 
the House unless we have some money to do it with ? ” 

A. I never heard of tha^ 

Q. No such talk as that at all with Mr. Eaton at any time ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he ask you in case you got a favorable report from the committee 
if there was any doubt but that the report would be adopted by the House, 
and did you answer to him in substance, There is no doubt of it if I can 
have what I need to do it with ?” 

A. Part of that was said, what he said about the report of the committee 
is correct, but what I said about having something to do it with is not so. 

Q. What did you say in answer to him? 

A. I think I said there is no doubt but wh it we can get the bill through 
if it is reported favorable from the commiteee. 

Q. Did he ask you how much in your judgment would be needed to get the 
bill through ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you tell him that you had been out with some members of the Leg- 
isiature the night before and spent considerable money and that you had got 
four of them solid ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Had you been out with them ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And had not got anyone solid ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Nor had you attempted to, by the use of money in any way? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And did not tell him so at all ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you reply to any question of Mr. Eaton’s or say to him, whether 
questions or otherwise, that you could not tell how much money you were 



189 


going to need until you began to work and had made a further canvass in 
the matter ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you say anything of like kind or import? 

A. Not that I know of, sir. 

Q. Do you think you would have known ? 

A. I think so, yes, sir. 

Q. Did you tell him that Mayor Shackleton had promised to telegraph 
down any money ^ 

Q. Yes, sir. 

A. What did you say to him upon that subject? 

A. I told him Mr. Shackleton had gone home to fix up the matter betwixt 
Mr. Linton and ourselves if possible and to get some money or send some 
money. 

Q. Send some money for what ? 

A. For expenses. 

Q, Whose expenses? 

A. Mr. Fellows’. 

Q. In what way ? 

A. For general expenses. That is the idea I had of the expenses. 

Q. Not in any corrupting sense? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you state to him in substance or effect that if you should go out 
with a man and talk with him and make him any promise and then not have 
the money, you would lose his infiucnce and he would go back on you ? 

A. No, sir, I never thought of such a thing; never said any such thing. 

Q. Nothing on the subject at all? 

A. Nothing, sir. 

Q. Did he ask you in connection with the talk that you have referred to or 
any other talk in substance ‘‘wheiher this is a prudent thing, to be talking 
about the use of money in this way?” 

A. No, sir, I did not hear any such thing. 

Q. And did you in reference to anything of the kind say, You don’t need 
to be known in the matter at all. You furnish the money to me, or if you 
don’t want to trust me, you can give it to Fellows, and I will attend to the 
rest of it?” 

A. I told him to give the money to Fellows. That is all I said about that. 

Q. Did you tell tnem that they would not be known in the matter? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Nothing on that subject? 

A. No, sir. 

Q, Did he ask you what you proposed to do with it or how you proposed to 
use it, and did you say that you were pretty well acquainted with a good 
many here, and that there is a large number (about 34) uf Grand Army men 
here? 

A. No, sir, I did not say any such thing, because I never knew there was 
that amount here. 

Q. May I ask what number, so far as you know, of this body are Grand 
Army men? 

A. I don’t know. I don’t think there are over 15 or 20 any way. 

Q. Did you tell him in substance or effect that you were going to see any 
of those and send them to Fellows ? 


190 


A. No, sir, never. 

Q. And did he ask you if it was customary when a bill is pending here to 
see members in this way ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And did you tell him that of course it was customary to see members in 
this way or to use money with them ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. There may be some other things that I have passed by; but since I have 
been calling your attention particularly to the statements made by Mr. Eaton 
against you in this matter, do you now recall any other conversation or part 
of conversation, previous to this you had not recalled? 

A. I don’t think of any now. 

Q. By what you did in this matter did you intend in any way to bring the 
good name of any member of this House into disrepute? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you intend in any way to cast reflection upon their integrity? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or to insinuate that these men could be purchased or corrupted at all? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you intend at that time, or at any time since, or before, to raise 
this money and convert it to your own use and benefit? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. The suggestion, as I understand it, of raising the fund came from Mr. 
Eaton. Am 1 right? 

A. Yes, sir; the second time we saw him. 

Q. And did not originate with yourself? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Now, aside from this $2 which you just exhibited here, have you received 
any money whatever from any person? 

A. No person, sir. 

Q. Have you ever during your legislative career? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Either this present session or in the former House ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever used or attempted to use any money whatever among 
your associates ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever intimated or in any way intended to lead any person to be¬ 
lieve that any member of this House was corrupt or corruptible ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever before been accused of any dishonorable or disreputable 
act ? 

A. Yes, sir, one. 

Q. What was that ? 

A. I whipped a man once and he said it was dishoncable. 

Q. That was all? 

A. That was all. 

Q. How long ago was that? 

A. Oh, about 12 or 13 years ago. 

Mr. Holden—Well, don’t do it again. Take the witness. 

The Speaker—Mr. Green, of Bay, sends up the following question: Did 
Mr. Eaton say to you that Saginaw City could well afford to spend some 



191 


money to have Florence attached to the city as we would soon have ten times 
as much back in taxes? 

A. There was something of that import the second time that I saw him— 
the time that he wanted to know if I did not want some money to use to get 
the charter through. 

The Speaker—Mr. McGregor sends the following question: Did I ever in 
the city of Lansing or elsewhere drink or smoke with you at your expense? 

A. No, sir. 

The Speaker—Also the following: Did you ever, here or elsewhere, hold 
any conversation with Mr. McGregor in relation to the Saginaw City charter 
or any other bill pending before this Legislature? 

A. I think not. 

Q. Did you ever see anything in his conduct or action, either in the House 
or out of it, to warrant you in the supposition that he could be influenced in 
his vote or otherwise by the use of money? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Holden—Counsel calls attention to one fact which a member thought 
in the shape it came was perhaps a reflection upon himself, and I at the time 
in your behalf you remember filed a disclaimer. It appears in your statement 
something concerning the fact that you once drank with Kepresentative 
O’Keefe. What was there in regard to that? 

A. I think Mr. O’Keefe, if I remember right, as nearly as I can remember 
asked me into I think it was the Windsor restaurant. He asked me in, and 
whether he took a drink or smoked I don’t remember now. I did think that 
he drank, but I am not sure; just as liable he took a smoke, as far as I can 
remember; but I took a drink myself. 

Q. As I have it here in your statement it appears that you drank with him. 
I do not understand that as meaning that he drank with you? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. But socially, in a friendly way? 

A. Yes, sir; I drank with him. 

Q. You drank, but whether he drank or smoked, you don’t know. 

A. No, sir; I don’t know. 

Q. Do you remember whether you have ever drank or smoked with any of 
the other members on this list, or otherwise. 

A. Yes, sir; I have. 

Q. Do you remember if any of them were on the list. 

A. I don’t think they are on the list. 

Q. Do you understand that Kepresentative Rumsey here is a man who 
smokes or drinks? 

A. I don’t think he is. I don’t know that he is. 

Mr. Holden. I think that is all with the witness. Nothing further occurs 
to me now. 

CKOSS-EXAMIJiTATION OF MILO H. DAKIM. 

By Mr. Conductor Herrington, 

Q. At the request of some of the members whose names are on this slip I 
will question you further in the line which has just been pursued. Did you 
ever have any talk with Mr. Seward Baker about this Saginaw charter bill? 

A. I don’t know whether I did about the amended Saginaw city charter 
bill or not. I know I have talked with him a number of times this winter— 
that is I think I have—in regard to the charter. 


192 


Q. How intimate are you with Mr. Baker ? Have you ever been out with 
him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever treated him or he treated you ? 

A. I think not. 

Q. Ever had any confidential talks with him ? 

A. Well, only socially, I think right here in the hall. 

Q. When other members were present ? 

A. Some of the members, yes, sir. 

Q. How intimate are you with Mr. Baldwin ? 

A. Well, I am not intimate. 

Q. You never have had any conversation with him at all upon any subject 
have you, more than to say, ‘‘ How do you do ? ’’ 

A. I think I spoke to Mr. Baldwin, I am not sure, in regard to our charter. 
Q. When? 

A. The first charter that I put through. I think I spoke to him. I am 
not sure. 

Q. Have you ever been out with Mr. Baldwin? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever been intimate in any way? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. In fact you regarded him as somewhat of a stranger did you not only 
as you have served in the same House with him? 

A. 0, I have played cards with him a little and had a little social time with 
him. 

Q. With Mr. Baldwin? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ever treat Mr. Baldwin or he ever treat you? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. How intimate are you with Mr. Bentley? 

A. I am not intimate with him. 

Q. Have you ever played cards with .Mr. Bentley? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you drank with him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Does he drink? 

A. I don’t know. 

Q. Is it not your understanding that he does not drink? 

A. I don’t know anything about it. 

Q. Do you know whether he smokes or not? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever been out with him at all? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever played cards with him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever had anything to do with him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You have the highest regard for Mr. Bentley have you not ? 

A. I have for all of them. 

Q. Have you ever been out with Mr. Burr ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you at all intimate with him ? 


193 


A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you had any conversation >vith him upon any subject that you 
now recall ? 

A. No. 

Q. Ever played cards with him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. With Mr. Crocker ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You are not at all intimate with Mr. Crocker 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Never have talked with him outside of this hall ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. When other members were present ? 

A. I don’t think I have. 

Q. Mr. Diekema ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you at all intimate with Mr. Diekema ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Never have had any talk with him upon any subject, have you ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. This session ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you ever had any talk with him about this bill ? 

A. I think not. 

Q. How much talk have you had with Mr. Diekema this session ? 

A. 0, I went over to his seat three or four times and asked him about a 
bill of mine that he had. 

Q. When the House was in session? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Outside of that you never have talked to him this session? 

A. Not that I remember of. 

Q. Mr. Dunbar—how is it with him? 

A. Well, I understood I was quite friendly with Mr. Dunbar. I don’t 
know what he thought about it. 

Q. Have you ever drank with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Smoked with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Played cards with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever been out with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever had any confidential talks with him ? 

A. Not that I remember. 

Q. Mr. Engleman, have you ever been out with him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever drink with him ? 

A. I think I have. 

Q. Ever played cards with him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you not state in your confession that you never had drauK with 
any of the members except Mr. O’Keefe ? 

25 


194 


A. That is all I could think of probably at that time? 

Q. Are you at all intimate with Mr. Engleman ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever had any talk with him upon any subject outside of this hall ^ 

A. Not that I remember of. 

Q. Mr. Herrington? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Never have had any conversation with him at all upon any subject have 
you ? 

A. Well, not confidentially that I know of. 

Q. Have you had any conversation with Mr. Herrington upon any subject 
whatever: 

A. I think I have met you in a cluster here in the House, telling stories 
and so forth, and so forth and so on. That is all. 

Q. Outside of this House, then, you never have had any conversation with 
Mr. Herrington whatever ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And not in the House except when a crowd was around? 

A. That is all I believe. 

A member.—Ask him if he ever drank with Mr. Herrington? 

Q. I will treat everybody alike in this matter. Did you ever drink with 
Mr. Herrington? 

A. No, sir. • 

Q. Ever smoke with him ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever play cards with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever been out with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever had any talk with Mr. Manly on any subject? 

A. I think not. 

Q. Did you ever drink with him or smoke with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever been out with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Never played cards with him? 

A. No, sir, I think not. I think I have not played cards with him, I am 
not sure—yes, I have. 

Q. Where? 

A. I think I played cards with Mr. Manly when we were going to Grand 
Eapids to the encampment. 

Q. That was on the train? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Never had any talk with him about this charter bill? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Mr. McCormick? 

A. No. 

The Speaker: Mr. McCormick has had these same questions put to the 
witness and he has answered them. 

Q. Mr. O’Keefe—you have stated in regard to him. Mr. Perkins, have 
you ever had any talk with him on any subject whatever outside of this hall? 
A. I think not. 




195 


Q. Have you had any private talk with him in this hall? 

A. I think not. 

Q. Never played cards with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever drank or smoked with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. With Mr. Rumsey? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Never have had any talk with him upon any subject, have vou, what¬ 
ever, outside of this hall? 

A. Well, I said no. I think I did two years ago. 

Q, I mean this session? 

A. No, I think not. 

Q. Did you ever smoke with Mr. Rumsey? 

A. I think Mr. Rumsey and I rode down on the train to Leslie together. 
I think I sat in the same seat with him and we talked all the way down. 

Q. When? 

A. Two years ago. 

Q. I am asking about this session. 

A. No, nothing this session. 

Q. Have you ever smoked or drank or played cards with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Mr. T. H. Williams—are you at all intimate with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever had any talk with him outside of this hall? 

A. Well, yes, I have talked with him outside of this hall. 

Q. You are not at all intimate with him, are you? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever drank, smoked or played cards with him? 

A. I have played cards with him. 

Q. Ever drank or smoked with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where did you play cards with him? 

A. On the train going from Jackson to Grand Rapids. 

Q. Is it not a fact that there are other members of this House with whom 
you are much more intimate than these fifteen Just named? 

A. I don’t think so. I dont know of but one or two in this whole House 
that I am intimate with. I don’t think there are more than one or two in this 
whole House that I am intimate with. 

Q. Mr. Baldwin desires me to ask you when and where you ever played cards 
with him. 

A. Going from here to Saginaw. 

Q. On the train ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you sure you ever had any talk with him concerning the charter or 
anything else except to say how do you do, and to pass the time of day ? 

A. As I said before, I thought I had but I was not sure. 

Q. Is it not a fact that there are other members in this House with whom 
you are better acquainted than with these fifteen Just named ? 

Mr. Dodge—The witness has already answered that question now. 

Mr. Oondnetor Herrington—I ask to have him answer the question. 

The Speaker—Answer the question. 


196 


Q. I ask you if there are not a good many other members of this House 
with whom you are better acquainted than with the fifteen mentioned. 

A. No, sir. You say a ^‘good many.” 

Q. Are you not better acquainted with Mr. Linton? 

A. No, sir; I am not better acquainted with Mr. Linton, that I know of, 
than I be with Mr. Kumsey. 

Q. Are you not better acquainted with Mr. Snow ? 

A. Yes, sir, 1 think probably I am somewhat. 

Q. Are you not better acquainted with Mr. McGregor? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you not better acquainted with those men who sit around you here 
in the House than with those fifteen? 

A. Well, there might be one or two. 

Q. None of those fifteen sit close to you in the House, do they? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. None of those fifteen board where you do, do they ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. There are quite a number of members sitting within a radius of ten feet 
of you are there not, in this House? 

A. Yes, sir, there are some. 

Q. There are some members who board down at the Eichele House where 
you board, are there not? 

A. Not sitting within ten feet of me. 

Q. Some members of this House board at the Eichele House? 

A. Yes, sir, there are a couple. 

Q. You are better acquainted with those members than you are with any of 
the fifteen, are you not? 

A. I am with one of them. 

Q. Are you not wi'h both of them? Neither of those two men who board 
at the Eichele House are on this list? 

A. No. 

Q. Don’t you meet them at meals and walk up and down with them? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you not better acquainted with some of the Grand Army men whose 
names are not on this list than with persons whose names are on this list? 
You are a Grand Army man, are you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have meetings here ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Been thrown in contact with them in that way ? 

A. I do not think I have attended but one of their meetings. 

Q. You are also a knight of labor are you not? 

Mr. Holden—He has testified he is. 

Q. You are a knight of laboi are you n<it ? 

A. I am happy to say I am. 

Q. I did not consider it was anything disgraceful or I would not have 
asked you. You are better acquainted with some knights of labor whose 
names are not on this list than with the members whose names are on the 
list? 

A. I’erhaps three or four. 

Q. Are you not with half a dozen? 

A. Might be half a dozen. 


197 


Q. You have met here frequently have you not? 

A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Have you never been present at meetings of Knights of Labor here in 
this House? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I wish to ask you why you put $25 opposite Mr. Rumsey's name? 

A. I have no particular idea. 

Q. Did you state '‘There is a man that will have to have $25?” 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Crowley say "What, Rumsey for $25?” 

A. I think he did say that. 

Q. Did you make any reply to it? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You can make no explanation of why you put $25 opposite Mr. Rum- 
seys name? 

A. No, sir; no particular explanation. 

Q. Can you make any explanation of why you put $5 opposite Mr. McOor- 
mick^s name ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Can you make any explanation of why you put $10 opposite Mr. 
Diekema’s name ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or the amounts opposite the names of any of the other members? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. No explanation whatever ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. It has been suggested that I ask you this question: " When you men¬ 
tioned playing cards, you meant playing cards socially, and not for money ? 

A. That is what I meant. 

Q. Did you have a conversation with the mayor at your house, in Saginaw, 
about the 16th or 17th of this month ? 

A. Yes, sir, Sunday. 

Q. Did the mayor state to you at that time that it would be necessary to 
bring some money down to get the charter through, but that he did not have 
any himself ? 

A. He said it would be necessary to bring down some money to pay the 
expense. 

Q. Are you sure that he said to pay the expenses ? 

A. That is the way I understood it. 

Q. I did not ask you if that is how you understood it. I asked you if that 
is what he said. 

A. That is the way I understood it. 

Q .Is that the way you understand he said it; is that what you mean ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you present when he had a talk with Mr. Binder? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You had a talk with Mr. Eaton on the first floor of this building ? 

A. Yes sir. 

Q. You heard Mr. Fellows testimony ? 

A. I heard part of it. 

Q. Mr. Fellows testified as follows: " As I met them we shook hands and 

Mr. Eaton asked how things looked in regard- 


198 


The Speaker—The following question has been^sent by Mr. S. Baker: 

Q. Is it not a fact that the witness never said anything to him about the 
charter only as some motion was pending before the House, or while the bill 
was under consideration, or as the House was about to convene when the bill 
would be taken up ? 

A. I think Mr. Baker wanted to know where the trouble was betwixt me 
and the lobby that came down in opposition to me, and I explained it to him. 

Q. Did you ever talk with Mr. Baker about the bill outside of the capitol? 

A. I don’t think I ever did. 

The Speaker—The following question is asked : Are there any knights of 
labor on the list checked, and if so, how many? 

A. I do not call to mind now that there are any. Yes, I think there are two. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Mr. Williams and Mr. Manley? 

A. Yes, I think so. I don’t know. 

By Mr. Conductor Herrington—Q. I was reading to you when interrupted 
from Mr. Fellows’ testimony, ^^As I met them we shook hands, and Mr. Eaton 
asked how things looked with regard to the charter. I said they looked first 
rate, and he said what did Shackleton go back to Saginaw for?” Did that 
occur down on the first floor in your presence ? 

A. I think I heard something of that import. 

Q. This is also Fellows’ testimony: And Mr. Dakin spoke and said he 

went back with Linton to fix his matter of Florence between East Saginaw 
and Saginaw City and to bring back some money to give him for Fellows’ 
expenses?” 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You said that? 

A. I think I did. 

Q. And Mr. Eaton asked him if he thought any money could be used 
with the members in the interest of the charter,”—did Mr. Eaton ask that of 
you? 

A. I don’t remember. 

Q. And did you reply in the language of Mr. Fellows, ^^Mr. Dakin says of 
course he could in a social way?” 

A. I might have said that. Read that again. 

Q. “ Mr. Dakin says of course he could in a social way.” 

A. I might have said that. I don’t know. 

Q. If you did say that that was the first talk about money, was it not? 

A. The first talk I had about money was at my house. 

Q. If you did say it to Mr. Eaton, that was the first talk you ever had with - 
him about money? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And if you did say that then, you first broached the subject of money 
to Mr. Eaton, did you not? 

A. I never broached the subject of money to Mr. Eaton. 

Q. If you said that you did, did you not? 

A. That was the only time there was anything said about money, at that 
time. 

Q. Then you first spoke of the subject of money, did you not? 

A. Under that head, yes. 

Q. And after Mr. Eaton asked you if you thought money could be used 
with the members in the interest of the charter, you replied Of course it 
could, in a social way?” 


199 


A. No, I don't recollect that and I don't think it. 

Q. What did you do Monday after you reached here ? 

A. 1 came up to the hall I think. 

Q. Did you attend the session of the House that afternoon ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Fellows say in the presence of yourself and the mayor on Mon¬ 
day evening that money could be used to good advantage here ? 

A. No, sir. On Monday evening ? 

Q. Yes. 

A. Here? 

Q. Yes. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Anywhere in Lansing? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. On your going to the train with the mayor on Tuesday morning did 
you ask the mayor for that two dollars ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Didn't you know you were doing wrong when you kept it ? 

A. No, sir; if I did I should not have kept it. 

Q. What did you keep it for ? What right did you think you had to keep 
that two dollars ? 

A. I had just as much right to keep it as I would to throw it down on the 
ground. 

Q. Mr. Shackelton didn't owe you two dollars ? 

A. No, sir; and when I took it in my hands I didn't know what he wanted. 
Q. When he said to take it and buy beer with it did you take it for that 
purpose ? 

A. No, sir; because I didn't buy beer with it. 

Q. Why did you keep that two dollar bill ? 

Mr. Dodge—I object to that cross-examination. It is improper in the first 
place, and in the next place the witness has fully explained everything with 
regard to the two dollars. He says after he refused it two or three times he 
finally took it rather than to let it go on the ground, and put it in his 
pocket, and he now produces it here and says it is the same identical two dol¬ 
lar bill. I think it is improper under the testimony. 

The Speaker—Answer the question if you can. 

Q. I asked you why you preserved that two dollar bill? 

A. Because I didn't want to throw it away. 

Q. You kept it in your pocket? 

A. Because I didn't want to throw it away. 

Q. And that is the only reason why you kept it and produced it here to¬ 
day? 

A. That is the only reason. 

Q. You say you were going to have a feast down at the Eichele house? 

A. No, I didn't say that. 

Q. What did you say? 

A. I said it was our intention. 

Q. It was your intention to have a feast down at the Eichele House? 

A. Yes, providing— 

Q. You got the money? 

A. Providing we got the money and providing we got the house, which I was 
sure of. 


200 


Q. You intended to clean out the dining room and have a dance? 

A. Yes. I knew it could be procured for the purpose. 

Q. Did you intend to invite ladies to this dance, the members and their 
wives? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you intend to invite Mr. Bentley and his wife to the dance? 

A. I intended to invite all those that had wives. 

Q. Then you intended to invite Mr. Bentley and his wife, Mr. Burr and his 
wife, Mr. Deikema and his wife, Mr. Dunbar and his wife, Mr. Engleman 
and his wife, Mr. Herrington and his wife, Mr. Manley and his wife, Mr. 
McCormick and his wife, Mr. O’Keefe and his wife, Mr. Rumsey and his wife, 
Mr. Williams and his wife? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Mr. Crocker and girl and Mr. Baker and girl? 

A. I don’t know anything about the girls. 

Q. You did intend to invite these members and their wives down to a dance 
at the Eichel house? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many of these fifteen whom I have named did you know were in 
the habit of dancing? 

A. I didn’t know that there was one of them. 

Q. Did you intend to invite any others than these fifteen down to the 
Eichele House to dance? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who else? 

A. Well, noc a great many more, because there wouldn’t be room. 

Q. About how many others? 

A. That I didn’t know. 

Q. Had you ever met any of the wives of these gentlemen ? 

A. No. sir. 

Q. That is sort of a saloon and restaurant down there, isn’t it? 

A. Something of that kind. 

Q. They keep a bar there ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And sell liquor? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Holden—Do they at the Lansing House also? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Wait a moment, I am examining the witness. 
Q. How much did you expect it would cost to have this dance down there? 
A. I didn’t have any expectations. 

• Q. Didn’t you say that when you marked down on this slip you had in^your 
mind how much it would cost? 

A. Yes, but I didn’t know how much less it would cost. 

Q. About how much was it in your mind to spend for that dance and feast? 
A. From a hundred to a hundred and twenty or a hundred and fifty dol¬ 
lars. I didn’t know the amount I needed. 

Q. You intended to have an orchestra from Detroit? 

A. I intended to have the best we could get. 

Q. Who did you suppose would raise this 1150? 

A. I expected the City of Saginaw would. 


201 


Q. You expected Mr. Shackleton would contribute? 

A. I didn’t expect whether he would contribute a cent or not. 

Q. You expected the City of Saginaw would contribute it? 

A. It didn’t make any differenc to me. 

Q. Who did you expect would contribute it. 

Judge Van Zile—I object to it. It seems to me it is a mere matter of specu¬ 
lation. It is not what was said or what was done that the counsel is inquiring 
about, but it is the expectation of what these gentlemen would do with refer¬ 
ence to something that has never happened, and it strikes me it is not proper 
eross-examination. 

The Speaker—Confine your question to what took place. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I did not wish to state the purpose of this tes¬ 
timony for the very obvious reason we have charged him with soliciting money. 

Judge Van Zile—(Interrupting) You haven’t made any proof of that. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I was just about to if you gentlemen had not 
put your witness on guard. I asked the question who he expected would 
raise this 1125 for this purpose. 

The Speaker—His answer is he thought it would come from the city of 
Saginaw. 

Q. To be allowed as an account passed through the common council? 

Judge Van Zile—I object again to this question. It is what he expected as 
to whether it would be allowed. By a bill passed through the common coun¬ 
cil. It strikes me that that is not only immaterial, but it is subject to the 
same objection that I made to the previous question. It certainly is imma¬ 
terial because there is no charge here that he expected to receive any money. 
The charge is that he solicited money, not that he expected it, but that he 
solicited it. 

The Speaker—The Chair is of the opinion that the question is not proper. 

Q. Whom did you expect would bring this money down, the mayor? 

Judge Van Zile—I make the same objection to this question. It is mere 
speculation; there is nothing of that kind and it is not anything that has 
happened. 

Q. I will change the question. Did you expect to get this money from 
Mayor Shackelton ? 

Judge Van Zile—I make the same objection. 

The Speaker—He may answer that. 

A. I expected this far, that when Mr. Shackleton was at my house he says 
it will probably be necessary to take some money out in interest of the char¬ 


ter. 

Q. Then you expected that he would, did you not ? 

A. I didn’t know whether he would or not. 

Q. Did you expect this 1125 would come through the mayor, Mr. Shakle- 
ton ? 

Mr. Holden—Mr. Speaker, you have already ruled out the question and 
very properly, I think. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—He has already ruled it in. 

Mr. Holden—Then why ask it again? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Because the witness did not answer the ques- 
tion. 

The question was here read by the official stenographer as follows: 

Q. Did you expect this 1125 would come through the mayor, Mr. Shackle¬ 


ton? 


26 


202 


A. I didn’t expect it from Mr. Shackleton no more than from the rest of 
the committee. 

Q. Did you expect any of it from Mr. Shackleton? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. None whatever? 

A. I expected it from him the same as I did the rest of them. 

Q. Then you did expect some from Mr. Shackelton ? 

A. But not the $125 because I didn’t know that I could get that amount. 

Q. But you expected Mr. Shackleton would contribute some of this 
$125 or the amount that was raised ? 

A. I didn’t expect it because 1 didn’t know anything about it. 

Q. You stated that you expected he would contribute with the rest of tnem. 
Whom do you mean by the rest of them ? 

A. I mean Mr. Eaton when he said to me that he had some money and 
wanted to know if I wanted some to help further along the interests of this 
charter. 

Q. Then you expected to get some from Mr. Eaton as I understand you ? 

Mr. Dodge—I submit that is not quite fair. He is calling Mr. Eaton into 
this transaction and saying “You expected to get some money from Mr. 
Eaton, did you?” This witness says he didn’t have any expectations at all, 
and yet counsel is constantly insisting that this witness had some expectations 
about the matter that he disclaims entirely. If the speaker please, this 
witness, until the final action of this House upon the question pending here 
ought to be treated with at least the common courtesy as given in courts of 
the lowest possible jurisdiction. He ought not to be crowded in the manner 
that counsel are undertaking to pursue with him, and he is entitled to a little 
more consideration than witnesses ordinarily on the stand until this House 
has, by a vote, pronounced their verdict upon him, and then, if it is not 
guilty in the fullest extent, he is entitled to as much consideration perhaps as 
any other member. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—The gentleman has made quite a speech to 
the House, and I will make a little one. I will say that on the direct exam¬ 
ination we did not make an objection. We let everything come in, and we 
hoped that they would not try to conceal anything on the defense. 

The Speaker—Answer the question. 

(The question was read by the oflScial stenographer as follows:) 

Q. Then you expected to get some from Mr. Eaton, as I understand you? 

A. As I said before, I didn’t expect anything. 

Q. Why did you talk about the person if you didn’t expect anything? 

A. From any particular one. It was told to me that there was money of¬ 
fered to me if I wanted it for that purpose. 

Q. Didn’t you expect to get some from Mr. Eaton, when he told you that 
he would see what he could do about it? 

A. I didn’t expect whether he would fulfill or if he would do as he said or 
not. 

Q. Who do you mean by the rest of them ? 

A. I mean Mr. Shackelton. 

Q. Who else? 

A. Mr. Crowley. 

Q. Who else? 

A. Mr. Tillotson. 

Q. Who else? 


203 


A. That is all. 

Q. Have you from the time you came down here upon last Monday morn¬ 
ing up to the present time tried to conceal anything or cover up anything? I 
mean on the morning of the 18th? 

A. Not that I know of. 

Q. From the morning of the 18th to the present time have you tried to 
conceal or cover up anything that you had done? 

A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Do you consider that you did anything wrong? 

A. Well, yes. 

Q. When did you first come to that conclusion? 

A. When I made out the list. 

Q. You knew then that you had done something wrong? 

A. I knew since that I did. 

Q. How soon after making out that list did you know that you had done 
wrong? 

A. Probably 15 or 20 minutes. 

Q. That list was made out on Tuesday, the 19th? 

A. I knew it when Mr. Fellows spoke to me about it. 

Q. Then in your statement to the 15 members in the Speaker’s room 
didn’t you state that you didn’t consider that you had done anything wrong? 

Judge Van Zile—I object to that. That statement is taken down and 
reduced to writing and been introduced in this case and it is the best evi¬ 
dence of what he said. 

Q. In your statement you said consider this an honorable thing to do.” 

A. Getting up the dance, yes. 

Judge Van Zile—I wish you would read what precedes that. 

Mr. Herrington—This is it: “I had seen three of these men smoke and no 
more. I considered this an honorable thing to do. I didn’t intend to let 
you know whose money was feasting you.” 

Q. That is what you referred to when you said that yo condsidered it an 
honorable thing to do, did you? 

A. About the feast, yes 

Q. You referred to the feasting and not to the getting of the money? 

A. Well, 1 thought it would be an honorable thing to get the money for 
' the feast, yes. 

Q. Did you think it was an honorable thing for you to write down the 
amounts opposite the names of the fifteen? 

A. I found out afterwards it was not. 

Q. When did you first come to that conclusion? 

A. When Mr. Fellows spoke to me about it. 

Q. Then when you were in the Speaker’s room, what was your idea there; 
had you then concluded it was a wrong thing to do? 

A. Which? 

Q. To write down those amounts opposite the names of the fifteen. 

A. I don’t understand that question. 

Q. At the time you were in the Speaker’s room when these 15 members 
were present did you then conclude that you did a dishonorable thing in 
writing down opposite their names the amounts of five, ten and twenty-five 
dollars? 

A. I don’t think it is dishonorable only it was out of place and it should 
not have been done. 


204 


Q. Then you consider now that there was nothing dishonorable in that, do 
you? 

A. I did not consider it a crime. • 

Q. Did you consider it dishonorable? 

A. I didn’t do right. 

Q. Did you consider it dishonorable? Can’t you answer that? 

A. You could not call it honorable or dishonorable I think. 

Q. Did you consider it right or wrong? 

Mr. Dodge—He has stated repeatedly that he did not consider it right, or 
honorable or dishonorable. 

Q. Will you answer whether you considered it right or wrong? I have not 
asked you the question before? 

A. Well, yes, I should not have done it. 

Q. Then you consider it wrong? 

VI r. H olden—He has so stated. 

Q. Mr. Conductor Herrington—Do you admit that he has stated it was 
wrong? 

Mr. Holden—Certainly we will admit that he stated it over and over when 
he first began to realize it. 

Q. Did you so consider it when you were in the Speaker’s room? 

A. I cannot remember what I considered then. 

Q. You say an agreement was had between Mr. Shackleton and Mr. Linton 
on the evening of the 18th? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And it was then considered that the charter bill would go through with¬ 
out opposition? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. When did you first consider that the bill would go through without op¬ 
position? 

A. I never considered it that way yet. 

Q. You seated in your direct examination that you told some of these gen¬ 
tlemen that the bill would go through all right if there was no opposition 
from the committee? 

A. I don’t think I stated that. If I did I didn’t understand it, because I 
knew East Saginaw would fight it anyway. 

Q. Why did you try to get this slip of paper from Mr. Eaton ? 

A. After Mr. Fellows had apprised me of the fact that I hadn’t done the 
proper thing. 

Q. You said they could give the money to Fellows. If it was an honorable 
thing to do why did you want them to give the money to Fellows? 

A. Because I didn’t want anything to do with it—that is, with the handling 
of the money. I am very peculiar about that; I want to account for every 
cent I have. 

Q. When you were in the Speaker’s room and these fifteen members present, 
you were not threatened in any way—were you ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Nor intimidated? 

A. I think not. 

Q. You were treated courteously? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You were not excited ? 

A. About that I should say I was. 


205 


Q. Was the bill to amend the charter of the city of Saginaw, which was 
prepared under the direction of the common council of the city, sent to you 
for introduction to the House? 

A. No, sir; it was given to me. 

Q. Did you introduce that bill? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Who did? 

A. No one. 

Q. Why didn^t you introduce it? 

Mr. Dodge—I object to that as immaterial. 

Q. Was any other bill to amend or to revise the charter of the city of Sag¬ 
inaw sent to you or given to you to be introduced by you to this House ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. By whom was it given or sent to you ? 

A. By the secretary of the union labor party. 

Q. Who prepared the bill ? 

A. A committee of unioQ labor men. 

Q. Who drafted it ? 

A. The Hon. L. C. Holden. 

Q. One of your counsel. By whose order do you know, was this bill pre¬ 
pared which you introduced ? 

A. By the working people of Saginaw. 

Q. You introduced the last named bill, did you ? 

A. Which bill do you mean ? 

Q. The bill prepared by the local assembly. 

A. There was not a bill prepared by the local assembly. 

Q. Well, the Knights of *J..abor? 

A. Nor by the Knights of Labor. 

Q. Did you substitute the last-named bill for the bill which you understood 
was prepared by the council ? 

A. No, sir, made no substitute whatever. 

Q. Who did substitute ? 

A. No one. 

Q. Did you tell any citizen of Saginaw that the bill you had introduced in 
the House amending the charter of the city of Saginaw, and which passed 
the House under a suspension of the rules, without reference to any com¬ 
mittee of the House, was the same bill that had been sent to you as a bill 
prepared by the Common Council, and that it had passed the House in the 
form in which you received it, without amendment? 

Mr. Holden—That is objected to as too indefinite. 

The Speaker—Let the witness answer the question. 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Which bill was it that passed the House? 

A. The labor union bill—the union labor bill. 

The following question submitted by a member, was read by the Speaker: 

In making the list of names, why did you put the different amounts op¬ 
posite different names? 

A. Just merely to make up the amount which I thought would be neces¬ 
sary. 

Q. Have you ever met Mr. T. H. Williams in an assembly of Knights of 
Labor? 

Mr. Ogg—You need not answer that question, Mr. Dakin. Mr. Speaker— 


206 


Mr. Dakin has taken an obligation as a Knight of Labor not to reveal such 
matters as that. He is not supposed to tell what takes place. 

The Speaker—Mr. Dakin can assert this right if he desires. 

Mr. Dodge—The Speaker has a right to protect the witness. 

Mr. Holden—That is a privileged question, which I think the member who 
submitted it, if he understood the matters, would undoubtedly withdraw. 

Mr. T. H. Williams—I submitted that question, and I would like an answer 
to it. 

Witness—You can have it. I don’t think I ever met you in an assembly. 
I have not been in one in this city. 

The Speaker—Here is another question which Mr. Williams sends up: 

Q. How do you know that Mr. Williams is a member of that organization? 

Mr. Dodge—Has he testified to any such thing ? 

Witness—I did not say that he was. 

Mr. T. H. Williams—He said so. 

A. I said I thought there were two and I named them. 

Q. Whom did you refer to? 

A. Mr. Williams and Mr. Manly. 

The Speaker—Are there any other questions ? 

Mr. Grenell—Ask him if he knows, of his own knowledge, that either of 
these gentlemen are knights of labor. 

The Speaker—Do you know of your own knowledge that either of these 
gentlemen are knights of labor? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Holden—That was only an impression of your own that you had in 
regard to it? 

A. Yes, sir, just an impression. 

Q. You do not claim to have any knowledge upon the subject? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you ever intoxicated? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Concerning the Eichele House in this city, it has been asked if they did 
not have, a bar there and you stated that they have. Where is the bar with 
reference to the dining-room? 

A. It is on one side of the house, and where the stairs go down to the 
dining-room is on the opposite side. 

Q. On the same floor? 

A. No, sir, on another floor. 

Q. On a different floor altogether from the dining-room? 

A. From the bar. 

Q. That is, the bar and dining-room are on different floors? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is it not a fact that a large number of very respectable people, members 
of this House some of them, and some of the Senate, and other gentlemen 
stop there? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. At that hotel? 

A. Yes, sir; I have seen as respectable people there as I ever saw any¬ 
where. 

Q. Is it not a fact that at [least one or two Senators have stopped there 
during the present session? 

A. Yes, sir. 


207 


Q. As regular boarders and are yet there? 

A. Yes, sir, I think there were three two years ago. 

Q. And some of our town’s people—business men—board there? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Lansing people? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It is a fact that at both the Lansing House and the Hudson House and 
the Chapman House they also have dining rooms and bars, is it not? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—That is objected to as incompetent and imma¬ 
terial. 

The Speaker.—Answer the question. 

A. Yes, sir; as far as I know. 

Q. Is there any hotel in this town, so far as you know, where they do not. 
have both a dining room and a bar ? 

A. I think there is one down by the bridge. I don’t know how it is now,, 
but about a year ago I was there and I think they did not have a bar. 

Q. That is the only one you know of and that is simply an impression as to 
whether they do or do not ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Speaking about the charter which you say was prepared by the direction 
of the working men and introduced by you, you have stated that the writing 
was done by myself ? 

A. As far as I know, yes, sir. I wish to make that qualification. 

Q. And were among those working people that requested the writing to be 
done, a number of the members of the common council ? * 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And do you know whether they brought to the one who wrote the par¬ 
ticular sections they desired amended, and a written statement of the manner 
in which they desired them to be changed ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And it was drawn precisely in accordance with their request in that re¬ 
spect, was it not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And aside from that I have had nothing whatever to do with it have I? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Either in Saginaw or since it has arrived here? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. So far as you know, what part have I taken in getting that measure 
before this House or through it, or to defeat it in any way? 

A. None whatever. 

Q. Some question was asked in regard to playing cards, and the gentle¬ 
man asked further if it was for money and you said no. Did you ever play 
for money or any valuable thing ? 

A. I never played cards for money in my life. 

Q. Whatever card playing you have done has been simply in a social way 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With friends ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

The Speaker—Mr. Manly sends up this question: 

Q. Did you not mark those names without regard to who they were ? 

A. No, sir, I think I had regard. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—What regard ? 


208 


A. That they were influential men of the House. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—And you picked out those that you considered 
were the leading influential men ? 

A. A part of the leading and influential men. 

Q. And picked them out because of their standing ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Both as intelligent and upright honorable men ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Picked them out for that reason ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

And because their character was above reproach ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

By Mr. Holden: 

Q. No amounts were put there until Mr. Eaton had induced you to check 
certain influential ones ? 

A. No sir. 

Q. And then after that you were asked by Mr. Eaton to put the amounts 
opposite the names ? 

A. As a matter of convenience to know about what was wanted, he said. 
The Speaker—Mr. Holt sends up the following question: 

You stated that Mr. Eaton said at the time the roll call was made that 
this matter should go no further, did you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. If so,.what did you understand Mr. Eaton to mean by the expression, 
:and did you not wish that the matter should be kept secret? 

A. No, sir, not a word said. He made that remark, and there was nothing 
said before or previously in relation to that remark. 

Q. Further than this, did you not then and there think you had done 
wrong ? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Dodge—Jerome Shank will please take the stand. 

TESTIMONY OF JEROME V. SHAMK. 

By Mr. Dodge: 

Q. What is your full name? 

A. Jerome I. Shank. 

Q. Where do you reside? 

A. In this city. 

Q. How long have you lived in this city? 

A. About three years. 

Q. I hear one of the members ask what Shank you are. Are you a brother 
of Dr. Shank of this city? 

A. I am. 

(Q,. What is your business? 

A. At present I have no business. I am doing a little writing for the ex¬ 
amining board here. 

Q. \\ hat examining board ? 

A. The board of pension examiners. 

Q. What other business do you do at your leisure, if any ? 

A. Why, I do a little gardening and write some for the paper. 

Q. What papers do you contribute to ? 

A. At present I am contributing to the Lansing Sentinel. 


209 


Q. A short time since, within the past two or three weeks, did you meet 
some gentlemen in the office of the Lansing Sentinel who had something to 
say to you about the respondent, Milo H. Dakin ? 

A. I did. 

Q. What did those gentlemen have to say to you with reference to Milo H. 
Dakin, if anything ? 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—We object until he draws out the fact who those 
gentlemen were. 

Mr. Dodge—I will do that in the next question. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—We object unless that is done at this time. 

Mr. Dodge—I promise to do that in the next question. 

The Speaker—Reverse the order of the question. Ask the other question 
first. 

Q. Have you seen any one of those gentlemen on the witness stand that you 
met in the Sentinel office, as you remember? 

A. I think I have. 

Q. Was it Mr. Frederic L. Eaton, as you remember? 

A. Well, I don’t know what his first name is. 

Q. The witness with glasses who was on the stand? 

A. Yes, sir. It is the witness I know here as Mr. Eaton. 

Q. What did Frederic L. Eaton say to you about Milo H. Dakin, if any¬ 
thing? Give the substance as nearly as may be. 

A. Well, without undertaking to give ihe whole conversation, if I am right 
about recognizing Mr. Eaton, he said to me that that man Dakin was raising, 
I think he said the devil, with the charter—alluding to the Saginaw charter— 
and that we ” meaning himself and the gentlemen with him. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—We object to what he meant. State what he 
said. 

A. Well, that We are down here to knock him out,” and I think he said 
^‘he—perhaps ^ we ’—are after Mr. Dakin’s scalp, and mean to have it.” 

Q. About what day was it or date ? 

A. It was on a Monday, and either two or three weeks ago, I think. 

Q. You cannot be positive about the exact date? 

A. No, sir, I remember it was on Monday because, on their speaking of 
going up to the House from the Sentinel office, I remarked that the House 
would not be in session, it being Monday forenoon. 

Q. How many gentlemen were there in company with Mr. Eaton on that 
occasion? 

A. Two I think, possibly three. 

Q. Was there any one else aside from the three gentlemen and Mr. Eaton 
present in the office of the Lansing Sentinel except yourself? 

A. No, I was alone in the office when they came in. 

Q. What was the first inquiry that Mr. Eaton made when he approached 
you in the office? 

A. They came into the office in a blustering way and greeted me as if they 
thought they knew me, or at least that was the impression it made on my 
mind. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Tell us how they greeted you and not your 
impression. 

Q. State now everything that took place, how this man acted and what 
they said to you on this occasion. 

27 


210 


A. I think when they came in that the gentleman whom I believe to be 
Mr. Eaton spoke very familiarly and said, ^^Good morning, or good day,^^ 
and on looking up I saw that he had discovered that I was not the person he 
took me to be. I was sitting in the chair at tJie desk usually occupied by the 
editor, and after a little talk among themselves, not addressed to me, he en¬ 
quired if I knew where Dakin was, and I told him I did not, and I think I 
asked him who Dakin was. I know at the time I did not know who Dakin 
was. I think I asked him who Dakin was. I was informed by him, or by 
some one of the three, I could not say which, answered me, who spoke up and 
said it was that damned traitor who was Kepresentative from Saginaw. I 
asked in what respect he was a traitor, or words to that effect. I do not 
pretend to remember just my language, but I am sure that was the substance 
of my inquiry, and then they told me about his having introduced here a 
charter different to the one that they had entrusted to him to introduce, or 
expected him to introduce, I would not say which it was, and went on to say 
that he and Fellows were damned traitors. I think that is the precise ex¬ 
pression that was used. I will try to recall it fully. 

Q. What time of the day was this? 

A. It was in the forenoon, and about noon. 

Q. This was not in the printing office where the work is done, it was a 
sort of an editorial room or the room used for editorial purposes? 

A. It was in the room used for editorial purposes. 

Q. And that office is located on Michigan avenue, leading to the capitol, 
on this side of Washington avenue, and is known as the Barnes & Gillett 
Block? 

A. Yes^ sir. I think, then, that one of them spoke about going up to the 
House, and I suggested that the members of the house would not be up here, 
it being Monday forenoon, and one of them, I cannot say which it was, said, 
“We will go up to the House anyhow,” and upon that they appeared to be 
about leaving the offie. I then remembered that the representative from Sag¬ 
inaw was a Knight of Labor and a workingman’s representative, and being 
that sort of a man myself I felt some interest in it, and asked if they were a 
delegation down from Saginaw to oppose Mr. Dakin, and was informed that 
they were. This was about as they were leaving the office, and the gentleman, 
whom I believe to be Mr. Eaton, on leaving apparently to go up here, in ac¬ 
cordance with the purpose they had announced, replying to my question 
whether they had come down as a delegation to oppose Mr. Dakin, made 
substantially this remark, “that they were after his scalp an'l meant to have 
it.” 

Q Was that the subject of the conversation had between you and these 
gentlemen ? 

A. That is the substance, and the conclusion of it, for that matter, for 
they went out of the room, and I supposed came up here. 

Q. Since Mr. Eaton has been upon the witness stand, and you have first 
seen him here from the gallery, have you taken particular pains to get closer 
to the gentleman, in order to be able to recognize him more readily? 

A. I have. 

Q. And now you give it as your judgment, from his appearance, and from 
what you have seen of him on the witness stand and elsewhere by coming in 
close contact, that he is one of the three gentlemen. Am I correct? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did these three gentlemen give you to understand that they were a com> 


211 


mittee themselves, or a part of a committee or delegation from Saginaw with 
reference to the city charter bill? 

A. I got the impression that there were others down with them, 

Q. With whom they came about this business? 

A. Yes, sir, that they were from Saginaw as a company of men, a delegation 
perhaps you would call it. 

Q. Did the other two gentlemen whom you think were in company appear 
to you as though they were laboring men, or were they men comfortably well- 
dressed and appeared more like perhaps merchants or business men or lumber 
men? 

A. I do not think I got the impression that they were laboring men. 

Q. You think you could have been able to judge whether they were labor¬ 
ing men from their appearance? 

A. They were not in laboring men’s work-day clothes, certainly. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mr. Dakin ? 

A. I know him when I see him. 

Q. How long have you known him ? 

A. Only a few days. 

CROSS-EXAMINATIOK BY CONDUCTOR DIEKEMA. 

Q. In what part of Lansing do you reside ? 

A. On Grand street. 

Q. What part of Lansing is that, in what direction from here ? 

A. The street next to the river, on this side of the river. 

Q. Have you a family ? 

A. I have three children. 

Q. A wife ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you live anywhere near Mr. Dodge ? 

A. I should think Mr. Dodge’s home is about half way to the place I re¬ 
side from the capitol. 

Q. To whom did you first tell this story? 

A. 1 cannot tell to whom I first told it. 

Q. Have you any recollection on that subject ? 

A. No, sir, I have not. 

Q. Do you remember about what time it was that you first told this story? 
A. No, I could not tell you. 

Q. Did you tell this story to anybody before you told it to Mr. Dodge? 

A. Yes, sir, I think I did. 

Q. Do you remember to whom? 

A. I told it to my brother. Dr. Shank, and I, told it to the editor of the 
Sentinel, Mr. Potter. 

Q. At what time did you tell it to the editor of the Sentinel? 

A. I should think it was about two or three days ago. 

Q. You say it was about three weeks ago on Monday that this happened? 
A. Two or three weeks. 

Q. Are you sure whether it was two or three weeks? 

A. No, I am not sure. I could not positively say whether it was two or 
three. 

Q. You are sure it was at least two weeks? 

A. I think it was at least two weeks. It was rot last Monday. 

Q. Are you sure it was on Monday ? 


212 


A. I feel very confident it was Monday for the reason I gave. 

Q. What was the reason? 

A. I remember the fact of speaking to them about it that they would not 
find the members here because it was Monday forenoon and the members 
would not be back. 

Q. Can you refresh your memory and tell us whether that was not a week 
ago last Monday ? 

A. I have tried very hard and cannot do it. 

Q. You can state it was either a week ago last Monday or one Monday pre¬ 
vious to that? 

A. I should think so. 

Q. Can you be positive ? 

A. I think I can be positive about that. 

Q. So we can take it as your positive statement that this conversation in 
the editor’s room was a week ago last Monday or one Monday previous to 
that ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You say it was about 11 o’clock when they entered? 

A. Perhaps a little later. 

Q. Have you been able to recognize either of the other two men? 

A. No, I have not; and I have looked carefully for them, too. I would 
like to say—I don’t know as it is worth while to say it—but I do not see well. 

Q. How long have you had this trouble that you cannot see well. 

A. A good many years. 

Q. Growing worse ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you have your glasses on that morning? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How far distant can you see easily and distinctly a person? 

A. In such a light as this I could recognize a person with whom I was 
familiar sitting at the table. I now can recognize Mr. Dodge. 

Q. If you were not familiar with a person would you recognize him meet¬ 
ing him on the street? 

A. Across the street from me, I think not. 

Q. What seems to have been the trouble with your sight? 

A. That has been a long while a mystery to me. I cannot tell you. I 
cannot see, that is all. 

Q. What business have you been engaged in for the last year ? 

A. For the last three years I have had no business except that that I have 
stated. I have done a little writing for the pension board. 

Q. Before those three years ? 

A. I have been a farmer, and have been a clerk in the capitol three or four 
years. 

Q. Where did you reside before you came to Lansing ? 

A. I have resided in the State of New York, in the State of Kansas, in the 
territory of Minnesota and in the State of Indiana. 

Q. Where did you reside before you came to Lansing ? 

A. In the State of Indiana. 

Q. How long ? 

A. About seven or eight months. 

Q. Lived in one place all that time ? 

A. No, not all that time; nearly all that time. 


213 


Q. What were you doing there ? 

A. I went there as agent for an encylopedia. 

Q. Was your family with you in Indiana ? 

A. No; I have not lived with my family in about 12 years, perhaps 11 
years. 

Q. Why not ? 

Mr. Dodge.—I object to that question as to why he has not lived with his 
family. If there has been any reason for their separation or there has been 
a separation or any domestic infelicity, I do not think this witness should be 
called upon to state it. It affects, perhaps, somebody else rather than the 
witness alone and certainly there can be no good of it. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema.—I have not seen the witness until today and I 
suppose it is very material in this case to know what kind of a man we are 
dealing with, what his history is, what his occupation has been and so on. 

The Speaker.—There is nothing wrong in asking the question. 

Question repeated. 

A. I should like to state it as briefly and fully as it is necessary. I lost my 
wife in Kansas on the 15th of September, I think 11 years ago, and her 
mother, my mother-in-law, reached our home in Kansas the day after my 
wife died and brought my two youngest children home with her to to the 
State of Michigan, because she could care for them better than I could in our 
new home, with my small means. My oldest child, a son, then I think nine 
years old, and myself stayed there about a year and a half, when my health 
having failed very much, by brother. Dr. Shank of Auburn, New York, came 
out there and visited me and remained with me some weeks, treating me, 
and took the remaining part of my family, my oldest son, home with him to 
New York State, and remaining in Kansas I think about a year after that, 
and how I got away from Kansas I cannot tell you, I do not know myself. 

Q. It was not by cyclone ? 

A. No, it was not. The fact is I was deranged; I suppose that is the truth 
about it. I suppose I came in a deranged state of mind. I cannot tell you 
about it. There is some time in my life that I cannot account for. 

Q. How long a time is that that you cannot account for? 

A. Some months. There is perhaps a year and a half of my life that i& 
quite confused to me. 

Q. Mentally deranged? 

A. Yes, sir, I think so. 

Q. Did your brother treat you for that? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you troubled with your eyes also at that time ? 

A. 0, no, that is an old trouble. 

Q. You say that was about eleven years ago? 

A. Not that I came away from Kansas. I should think that was about 
nine years ago. 

Q. You don’t know where you went during that time that your mind was 
deranged ? 

A. I don’t know. I could not tell you where I went. 

DAVID CKOWLEY, KECALLED. 

Examined by Mr. Dodge. 

Q. You have visited Lansing I believe you stated on your direct examina¬ 
tion before on several occasions, with reference to your city charter? 


214 


A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There has been considerable said about that amount of money that Mr. 
Tellows expended during those five or six days down here at Lansing, and 
therefore it is that I desire to ask you about the amount of money you have 
expended on your several trips down to Lansing? 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—We object to that as incompetent, irrelevant 
and immaterial. 

The Speaker—The objection is sustained. 

Mr. Dodge—That is our case. 

FREDERICK L. EATON RECALLED. 

Examined by Mr. Conductor Diekema. 

Q. You were present when Mr. Shank gave his testimony here a moment 
ago, were you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you hear his testimony ? 

A. I heard the greater part of it. 

Q. Did you hear his testimony relative to your coming in with two other 
men to the office of the Sentinel? 

A. I did. 

Q. What can yuu say as to the truth of that statement? 

A. I say that he is mistaken. 

Q. Were you ever in the Sentinel office? 

A. I was not. I never was in the Sentinel office in the city of Lansing. 

Q. Were you ever in any printing office in the city of Lansing? 

A. I never was except yesterday morning I went to the State printing office 
about 7 o’clock to see if the journal was issued. I stepped to the door and 
met a gentleman and inquired, and it was not out and I came away. 

Q. Were you here in Lansing a week ago last Monday? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you here in Lansing two weeks ago last Monday? 

A. I was not. 

Q. Were you here in Lansing three weeks ago last Monday? 

A. I was not. 

Q. Do you remember that you came to Lansing at all on this charter busi¬ 
ness on any Monday? 

A. Certainly not on any Monday since the 7th of March, and I don’t 
remember being here on any Monday this winter. 

Q. How can you fix that date that you were not here on Monday? 

A. By reference to my diary. 

Q. Have you that diary with you ? 

A. I have. At what date? 

Q. Say for all the Mondays in the last three weeks previous to this week 
Monday. 

H&A. On Monday the 4th day of April I was at home. If I remember right 
it was election day. I attended the election. On Monday the 11th day of 
April I went to Mt. Pleasant and argued and submitted a chancery case, the 
case of Saxon vs. Bennet & Harrison. On Monday the 18th of April I was at 
work in my office in Saginaw. I drew an agreement between two gentlemen 
on that date, which I remember I drew about 1 or 2 o’clock in the afternoon. 


215 


CROSS-EXAMINATIOK BY MR. DODGE. 

Q. During the examination of the witnesses here have you yourself, or the 
gentleman over near the picture there, been sending questions to counsel ? 

A. I have. 

Q. You have been taking part in propounding questions to witnesses on 
the stand? 

A. I have. 

Q. Who else, aside from members over there of the Saginaw delegation of 
gentlemen have been propounding questions? 

A. I think ex-Senator Foote suggested one question. Aside from that I 
don’t know that any one. 

Q. Did you send some questions up to the Speaker, too? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Your questions were sent to counsel? 

A. I either sent or handed them to counsel? 

Q. Then yourself and Mr. Foote and these other gentlemen there have been 
counseling together and some of you propounding questions or aiding the 
prosecution? 

A. As I have stated. 

Q. It is correct as I have stated it, isn’t it? 

A. Eead the question. 

The question was read by the official stenographer. 

A. I have propounded questions and Mr. Foote has propounded one ques¬ 
tion or suggested one question. 

Q. Have you been consulting together as to the method of conducting this 
prosecution and offering suggestions in pursuance of your counsel? 

A. To whom? 

Q. To these gentlemen? 

A. I have. 

Q-. You are especially anxious and interested upon the part of the prosecu¬ 
tion in this case, are you not? 

A. No, sir. Let me say I am anxious that the facts that I am aware of 
shall be correctly presented. 

Q. Didn’t you think that the counsel are capable of getting out those facts 
without your assistance and the assistance of those other gentlemen from Sag¬ 
inaw? 

A. In some instances, no. 

Q. Isn’t it true that to those gentlemen that you have repeatedly criticized 
Mr. Dakin and in very severe terms? 

A. To which gentlemen? 

Q. These gentlemen as well as other gentlemen? 

A. I don’t understand to whom you allude. 

Q. Well, the question is a broad one. 

The Speaker—Confine it to somebody; who are these gentlemen.-^ 

Mr. Dodge—The gentlemen he has been in consultation with. 

Mr. Deikema—Who are they? 

A. Colonel Little, Mr. Smith, ex-Senator Foote and ex-Mayor Hill. 

Previous question read. 

A. It is not. I have stated the facts to them which I have related here in 
evidence. 


216 


Q. Have you given to these gentlemen your personal opinion of Mr. Dakin? 

A. I don’t remember that I have. 

Q. Did you on one occasion coming down on the train, or have you on any 
occasion ever stated that you would undertake to have the scalp of Mr. Dakin 
or that you would make him some trouble? 

A. No, sir, not at any time or any place. 

Q. Or anything of that import or nature? 

A. Nor anything of that import or nature. 

Q. You are friendly with Mr. Dakin and have up to this time been 
friendly? 

A Yes, sir. 

Q. Then I ask you now why you are so exceedingly anxious to assist and 
volunteer your services upon the part of the prosecution in this case? 

A. Because I am anxious that these facts shall be correctly represented. 
Further than that I have no interest in the case. 

Q. Don’t you think that the House of Reprentatives and the learned coun¬ 
sel here are capable of doing that without your assistance? 

A. So far as they know what the facts are, hut as they have learned these 
facts from me, and they have from time to time overlooked some of the facts 
which I have stated to them, I have called their attention to those facts which 
I thought they had overlooked. 

Q. And the matters that they had overlooked you have suggested to them, 
and that was your only purpose? 

A. That was my only purpose. 

Q. Let me ask you in view of this testimony that you have given if you 
were not especially anxious and interested in this prosecution? 

A. I am not. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I object to that; he has answered it three or 
four times. 

Mr. Conductor Diekema—Did you ever see this man, Mr. Shank, before, 
that you remember? 

A. I do not know that I ever did. 

The Speaker—I understand this to be all the testimony. Under rule 9 the 
final argument on the merits made by three persons on each side, and the 
argument shall be opened and closed by members of the committee on the 
part of the House, each speaker being allowed not to exceed thirty minutes. 

Judge Van Zile—The rule does not intimate how many gentlemen will 
speak in opening on the part of the prosecution. I suppose that it will be 
fair that not to exceed one speech shoula be made in the closing of this 
argument. It would be unfair, as it seems to me, for them to make one speech 
in opening and then make two in closing. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—I will state what the committee have talked 
of, that is, that the committee should open, then the defense should follow 
with two speeches, ihen the defense with one and the committee close. 

Judge Van Zile—That would be in violation of the rule. 

The Speaker—Not as the chair understands it. 

Judge Van Zile—I supposed that the rule was that the committee should 
open, and then the defense make their arguments and the prosecution close. 

The Speaker—It simply says that the ^'Arguments shall be opened and 
closed by members of the committee on the part of the House,” and that 
would be so doing it. 


217 


Judge Van Zile—There isnT anything in this rule permitting anything on 
the part of the prosecution, except to open and close the argument. Cer¬ 
tainly a speech by them dovetailed between the speeches of the defense would 
not be either the opening or closing the argument. 

Mr. Conductor Herrington—Perhaps before this matter is determined it 
may be well to have it understood that all witnesses on either side may 
now be excused. 

Mr. Dodge—That is proper. 

The Speaker—Unless there is some objection that will be the understand¬ 
ing. All witnesses that have been subpeonaed on either side of this case are 
now excused. 

The chair will take it that the arrangement is that the committee shall 
open their case, to be followed by two members of the counsel for the ac¬ 
cused, when the committee will then be allowed an argument by another of 
their members, counsel for the defense following with their third argument, 
and to be closed on the part of the committee of the House The committee 
will proceed to open the case upon the part of the House. 

Mr. Snow—Mr. Speaker, and gentlemen of the House: When I was elected 
a member of the Legislature, from the third representative district of the 
county of Saginaw, I did not for a nioment believe that I should be called 
upon in this capacity, bnt that I was simply called upon to meet with you, 
gentlemen, here to revise and make such laws as were necessary to be made to 
advance and enhance the welfare of the great State of Michigan. But it so 
happens that I have been somewhat disappointed in my expectations, as this 
House has seen fit to place upon me a responsibility that I am determined I will 
not shirk. I have been called upon to act as an attorney in prosecuting 
my seat-mate, a gentlemen who lives in an honest and intelligent class 
of constituents, a gentleman whom they expected, when they elected 
him to office, would represent them honestly, conscientiously and uprightly, 
and to the utmost of his ability in this House. But it seems that by some 
means or other he has been induced, or has of his own accord and free will 
seen fit to stamp some of the members of this House with calumny and to 
bring their names into disrepute. 

Under the wise judgment of this House this committee that has been ap¬ 
pointed to investigate this matter have, after a careful consideration of the 
subject as presented to us, instituted and drafted charges against the member 
from the 1st representative district of the county of Saginaw, and what do 
those charges set forth? They say that the Hon. Milo H. Dakin did cor¬ 
ruptly Solicit and endeavor to secure money from said John H. Shackleton 
mayor of Saginaw City, and Frederic L. Eaton, of Saginaw, and from va¬ 
rious other persons for the purpose ostensibly of corruptly using such money 
among the members of the House of Kepresentatives of the Michigan State 
Legislature, to infiuence what ? To influence their votes in favor of the pass¬ 
age of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw City, then pending before the 
committees, on labor interests and municipal corporations of the House of 
Kepresentatives, but in fact for the purpose of corruptedly and unlawfully ap¬ 
propriating all or a part of such money for his own personal use and benefit. 

In the third charge he had been charged by this committee of corruptly 
making a list of names of certain members of the House of Representatives 
of the State of Michigan, together with the amount of money necessary to 
procure the vote and infiuence oLeach of said members, named in said list, 

28 


218 


in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw City, then 
pending before the committees jointly, and that said Milo H. Dakin did rep¬ 
resent the said Frederic L. Eaton of Saginaw, that to secure the votes and 
influence of said members it would be necessary to use with each of them the 
amount of money set opposite his name, thereby bringing the good name and 
character of said members into ill repute. 

I would say for the benefit of the counsel for the defense in this case that 
we claim and shall maintain that we have proven beyond a doubt articles two 
and three as set forth in those charges. 

Gentlemen of this House, I am not ashamed to say that I am a resident of 
the county of Saginaw. On the other hand I am proud because I am a resi¬ 
dent of Saginaw, and I hope that the members of this House will not cast 
any reflections upon me or upon the other members from Saginaw county 
because this disgraceful arrangement has been made, because this disgraceful 
transaction has taken place. Saginaw county, as you all know, is in the 
northern portion of the State of Michigan, and is one of the foremost 
counties in this great State, located on the Saginaw Bay, and interspersed with 
navigable streams, a very important and wealthy county. 

When the members of that county came down here to represent the best in¬ 
terests of that county and the best interests of the people of the State of 
Michigan they were expected by their constituents to represent them well; to 
make laws for one of the grandest and most influential States in the number 
that goes to make up the Union, a State that stands second to none in the 
Union as far as educational interests are concerned. We find on almost every 
four corners school houses, and church spires reared aloft, that represent to 
the passers by and the travelers who may go through this great State that the 
word of God is reverenced. A State that has to-day in its chief executive an 
honest, a grand, a noble man. A State that has a wise and judicial minded 
court of last resort. A State that has influential and conscientious and 
scrupulous men in State offices. 

A State that has at the other end of this building, people assembled to rep¬ 
resent the best interests of the State, people who sit there to act wisely, peo¬ 
ple that sit there and look over carefully the little errors that this House may 
make,and act conscientiously, honestly and uprightly in the whole proceedings. 
But we have a State to-day, when we come to the Representative Hall, that 
has cast over it a shadow. A shadow is now lingering ov(^r the north end of 
the Capitol of the State of Michigan, and what is the cause of it? Gentlemen 
of this House, you have heard the evidence in this case, and you know as well 
as I what the cause of it is. In my opinion, according to the evidence that 
has been given you here upon the witness stand, the great prime mover, the 
first instigator, the first man that had a rotten thought in his mind was the 
mayor of Saginaw City, 

According to the evidence in this case he was the first man that talked 
money, and, sirs, I candidly believe that if he had never talked money to 
Representative Dakin that these proceedings would never have been insti¬ 
tuted. And, sirs, because of the mayor in the city of Saginaw I claim that 
it is no excuse whatever for Representative Dakin to place opposite the 
names of these several gentlemen who are assembled here for a good and 
grand purpose, these figures. 

But, on the other hand, we should decide conscientiously, honestly, accord¬ 
ing to our best judgment, whether Milo H. Dakin is guilty of the charges 
preferred against him. 





219 


Three or four witnesses have testified upon the stand that Milo H. Dakin 
placed the several sums of money opposite the respective names of fifteen 
honorable members of this body. Question: Why did he do it? Did he 
have an honest purpose in doing: it? Did he do it to promote the best interests 
of this grand State of Michigan? Did he do it because his constituents ex¬ 
pected he would do such things when they elected him to otfice? Or did he 
do it for the purpose of gain, for the purpose of taking money, a portion of 
which belonged, according to the testimony, to the hard-working honest, in¬ 
dustrious people of the city of Saginaw, with the intention to put it down in 
his own pocket; money that belonged to the people who live in the city of 
Saginaw ; money that was voted by them to place in the city treasury of Sagi¬ 
naw to advance and enhance the best interests of the people of Saginaw City? 
I say was that his purpose? Or did he intend to pocket, that, money if it was 
paid him, and have a social dance down at the Eichele house and invite mem¬ 
bers to a social dance who never danced? 

Would it cost any more to let the lion. Mr. Eumsey dance on the floor at 
the Eichele House than it would to let another member dance who was only 
classed as a five dollar man ? Gentlemen, it looks to me as though he thought 
that the people that went to make up this great body here were as cheap as 
the sheep and goats upon a western plain; the sheep at five dollars a head 
and some of the goats at ten dollars, and one extra goat at twenty-five dol¬ 
lars. (Laughter.) Gentlemen, these intelligent and wise men that represent 
the best interests of the State of Michigan are not that kind of men. They 
cannot be bought and sold like so many sheep, and they are men upon whom 
no price can be fixed. They are not merchantable. They are not to be sold for 
gold. They are here to revise, repeal, make and put into the statute books 
such laws as their contituents demand. 

This body has seen fit to try one of its members who has transgressed the 
rules of etiquette, to say the least, by casting these reflections upon these dif¬ 
ferent members; by undertaking to get money of every man that he met on 
the streets almost—at least every man that hailed from Saginaw; for he 
knew, undoubtedly, that the people that live in that grand old city of Sagi¬ 
naw have money. There are weabhy people that live in the city of Saginaw, 
and as the mayor undoubtedly said, in my opinion, they could well afford to 
furnish the money. There is where the rottenness began, in that ignoramus 
of a mayor from Saginaw City; and if the good people of the city of Saginaw 
do not invite him to step down and out, then they ought to be chastised. 
And I believe they will do it. 

Now, gentlemen, the testimony in this case is very plain, indeed. There 
are other gentlemen w'ho will follow me, who are much more able to present 
these facts to you than I am, who will argue the merits and the demerits of 
the testimony in this case. We simply say that we claim that the evidence 
emphatically shows beyond any question of doubt that articles two and three 
have been established ; and we will simply ask at your hands, gentlemen of 
this House, that you do justice to yourselves. If you come to the conclusion 
that Milo H. Dakin has done wrong, say so. If you are satisfied, on the 
other hand, that Milo H. Dakin has not intentionally done any wrong, and 
that reparation has been made for the injuries done, say so. Deal honestly, 
justly, conscientiously, and righteously with this man. 

Mr. Bates moved that Eule one be suspended, and that this House stand at 
recess until seven o’clock, P. M. 


220 


For which 

Mr. W. A. Baker offered the following substitute: 

Resolved^ That rule one be changed to read as follows: Rule 1—The 
House shall meet daily at 10 o’clock A. M., and continue in session until 
12 o’clock noon—w^hen the Speaker shall declare a recess until 2 o’clock P. 
M., when it shall meet again and continue in session until 6:15 o’clock P. M.; 
when the Speaker shall declare a recess until 7 o’clock P. M., when the 
House shall meet again and continue in session until the arguments of coun¬ 
sel and committee are completed. 

Which was agreed to. 

The motion to amend rule 1, as amended by the substitute did not then 
prevail. 

On motion of Mr. Grennel, 

Rule 1 was suspended, two-thirds of the members present voting therefor, 

And the House took a recess until 7 P. M. 


EVENING SESSION. 

7:00 0 ^clock P. M. 

The House met and was called to order by the Speaker. 

Roll called: quorum present. 

The House resumed the investigation of the charges against Representa¬ 
tive Dakin. 

MR. DODGE. 

Mr. Speaker and Gentlemen of the House of Representatives: 

This, I think, is the most trying experience in my brief period as a lawyer, and I hardly 
know how to open this case to you on the part of the defendant. It is something 
entirely knew% not only to me, but entirely new to the people of the State of Michigan. 
I feel that I have more than an ordinary sense of duty here, and more than all I have a 
feeling, gentlemen of the House, it is that of sadness indeed. It w^as my privilege two 
years ago to serve with the gentleman as a member of this honorable body who is to-day 
on trial before you charged with malfeasance, misfeasance and venal conduct in office. 
Those are serious charges. Those are charges that if proven wull not only disgrace and 
forever humiliate the respondent, but will require you, as a sense of duty, to expel him 
from his seat upon the floor of this House. And now, as these proceedings are draw¬ 
ing to a close, permit me to thank not only the Speaker who has so ably and impartially 
presided over the proceedings, but the honorable members of this House for the uniform 
courtesy and attention given while the testimony and arguments that have thus far 
been made, have been heard. 

It has been stated by members, in one or two instances to my knowledge ; it has been 
stated by the press, wdiich I believe is the most powerful moulder of public opinion of 
the present age—it has been stated that the doom of Milo H. Dakin is sealed, and this 
came with almost official sanction, and it came before the testimony was commenced 
in this case, not only from various ones but from the press. They had him tried and 
convicted, and would have carried the sentence into execution if it had been possible, 
and to-day he would have been away from Lansing, resting under the disgrace and 



221 


ignominy that would follow an expulsion from the House of Representatives. But can 
this be true ? Can it be true of the members of this intelligent body ? I apprehend not. 
When my friend who preceded me, in his eloquent words eulogized the educational 
institutions of Michigan, in the beautiful language which he employed, when he soared 
so high and talked about the cloud reaching spires he filled every one of your hearts 
with a sense of pride, with a sense of gratitude, I have no doubt. At least I with him 
congratulate the people, not only the representative body here assembled, but the people 
of the State of Michigan that she stands to-day one of the first States in the Union for 
those advantages which he so beautifully illustrated, by way of her educational institu¬ 
tions. But while we have those educational institutions is there a lawyer, is there a 
member of this House who has carefully pursued his business career, that has not dis¬ 
covered that in her courts of justice there have been invariably laid down rules that have 
always governed, rules that always will govern, rules that affect the vital interest 
of not only of man’s property but his individual liberty. 

What is one of those rules ? Permit me to call your attention to it. I speak of that 
rule, laid down as a fundamental principle of law of evidence, of practice and advocated 
from time immemorial, that latent is the gist of all crime. My friend said to you in 
the opening of this case that he did not believe that Milo H. Dakin, if I understood him 
correctly, intentionally committed a wrong. Nor does any man I believe on the floor of 
this House think that Milo H. Dakin intentionally committed a wrong ; if a wrong has 
been committed, and he himself upon the witness stand says he perhaps committed a 
wrong, where is the intent, where is the motive ? And so with public opinion, with all 
that has been said upon this subject to mould public opinion and to bias this body if pos¬ 
sible, that is sitting to-day in judgment upon Milo H. Dakin, can it be that you 
have forejudged the case, that you have not been governed by law, not by any rule 
of evidence, but that you have been governed by idle rumor and by passion, and by 
feelings of distrust and dislike for this man who to-day is standing at this bar of justice ? 

If that is true I say to the members of the Michigan Legislature, come not into these 
magnificent halls to render your verdict, come not here where Milo H. Dakin has for 
nearly four years served the people of the State of Michigan, where he has to the very 
best of his ability discharged his trust ; where, because of the confidence reposed in 
him he was re-elected to the Legislature, as was stated, by an increased majority—I 
say then, if the members of the Michigan Legislature have forestalled a verdict andi 
forgotten the obligation which they took at the bar of the House on the openings 
day of the session, and that they are not trying this case under the solemn 
obligation that is upon them to discharge their duty, according to the law and under 
the obligation they have taken, if that is true, I beg of you not to come into this mag¬ 
nificent chamber to record your verdict, but rather seek out the subterranean recesses- 
of this capitol, where the cheerful light of day never shines, and there ereot the altar 
and immolate the victim. 

Who is Milo H. Dakin ? Let us briefly allude to his career. Forty-three or four years 
ago Milo H. Dakin was born in Ingham county, and the testimony I believe shows that 
he never knew his father, he either having died or been separated from him 
in his early age. At the age of ten years he went forth to maintain and sustain and 
protect and provide for his widowed mother. At the age of fifteen he went to the- 
front, enlisted to serve his country, and in behalf of this proud republic he helped' 
achieve the victory. He fought for you and for me. He fought gallantly and he fought - 
well. Never has stigma, disgrace or insult rested upon the name of Milo H. Dakin, 
as is shown by every witness who has been sworn in the case, until when? Not untill 


the 19th day of April, 1887. And from wliom does it come ? This part of the case is 
the most humiliating thing to me that we have to contend with. It is something that 
tifles me, that chokes me. It makes me wish that I had never been born, that this 
man Eaton, a member of the legal profession, who has been sworn as a witness in this 
case, should take the stand and solemnly say, as he did at the close of the case today, 
that he has no malice in his heart, no unkindly feeling for Milo H. Dakin. Do you be¬ 
lieve it? Gentlemen, upon your oaths and upon your consciences do you believe he told 
the truth ? Do you believe when he told you in his evidence when he first went upon 
the witness stand, that his feelings were simply a sense of fright, of surprise, of star- 
tlement? Do you believe that? If that is true I ask him in the name of God to explain 
to you how it is that he undertook still further to fasten upon this man the disgrace that 
has at last attached to him, even though he should be acquitted by the unanimous vote of 
this body. Would Milo H. Dakin have been here on trial to-day had it not been for this 
man, Frederic L. Eaton, this man who has hounded him from the beginning to the close, 
this man whose name has been invoked here as the prosecuting witness ? 

Members of the House of Representatives, this is an important occasion to Milo H. 
Dakin and to the people of the State of Michigan. This record will live after you and 
I have passed away. This record will be here as a monument to your acts, and I be¬ 
seech you and beg of you now to make haste slowly upon this occasion. 

As I said before the press and outside influences have been brought to bear ; and why ? 
Because they say that they have a confession, a statement from Milo H. Dakin that 
condemns him. Condemns him of what? Show me the law, human or divine, that 
Milo H. Dakin has violated. Show me the first act of criminality. Show me the first 
thing done by this man that would subject him in a court of justice to reprimand or 
punishment or fine. You will not undertake that ? You took the precaution in your 
several articles of specification of impeachment to strike out the words “ any illegal 
act,” and why did you do it ? Because the able and honorable committee appointed 
here to prosecute this case deemed it was necessary because they were without proof 
to sustain the allegations. That is the reason. 

And now what is the offense. I come down to the time these men were in this res¬ 
taurant and at the time the marking was done upon this slip of paper, and that is the 
only thing wrong, or the only crime that I understand will be argued to you in the close 
of this case on behalf of the prosecution, that Milo H. Dakin, there, in a thoughtless 
moment and under the influence perhaps of one or two glasses of wine and the associ¬ 
ates and surroundings, made those marks there ; but he never has denied it. He has 
admitted everything that has been charged against him, so far as making the marks 
,are concerned and reading off the names. But has it not been the proof in this case, 
from tbe beginning to the close, that Milo H. Dakin never has charged one honorable 
member of this body of being guilty, or being liable or susceptible of approach for any 
.corrupt or unlawful purpose. I apprehend that the members of this House, when they 
,come to consider the case, will be governed by the evidence. 

It is laid down as one of the rules that shall govern this proceeding, that you will fol¬ 
low, as near as may be, the rules that govern in courts of justice. Permit me to call 
your attention to Section 9 Article 4 of the Constitution. 

“ Each House shall choose its own officers, determine the rules of its in*oceedings, 
and judge of the qualifications, elections and returns of its members ; and may, with 
the concurrence of two-thirds of all the members elected, expel a member. No mem- 
shall be expelled a second time for the same cause, nor for any cause known to his con- 


223 


stituents antecedent to his election. The reason for such expulsion shall be entered 
upon the Journal, with the names of the members voting on the question.” 

There is your authority. That is ample and complete. If there is a disposition, under 
or without the evidence in this case to expel Milo H. Dakin and send him home in dis¬ 
grace, you have the authority, you have the power. When you have done that you are 
not only assuming the duty and the responsibility of expelling Milo H. Dakin, but you are 
establishing a precedent that possibly will govern Legislative bodies, not only in the 
State of Michigan, but elsewhere, hereafter. This vote will be forever of record. This 
vote will be forever of reference in cases of this character, if any should happen to arise 
hereafter, and the charges and the proof and every word of the testimony in the case 
will be on file for the inspection of succeeding generations, and you sitting here as a 
branch of the Michigan Legislature will be answerable for the responsibility of your 
action here, and you alone. 

Let me call your attention to one or two citations of authority with reference to the 
intent necessary to constitute crime. 

“ There must be a motive. There can be no crime without an intent, and the intent 
is not always inferable from the act done.” 

Bishop’s Criminal Law, section 212. 

“ Every crime must have necessarily two constituent parts, viz : An act forbidden by 
law and an intention.” 

Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, page 647. 

“ All indictments against officers for misbehavior must show that the act is done 
by corrupt and partially malicious and improper motives, and above all, with the 
knowledge that it is wrong.” 

Wharton’s Criminal Law, page 737. 

Roscoe’s Criminal Evidence, page 804. 

Show me the first act, the first thing that has been done by Milo H. Dakin that brings 
him within the several provisions laid down by these eminent law writers. Not one 
gentleman of the House of Representatives; and the authorities are replete with decisions 
upon the question of intent as here stated. I might read twenty-five or fifty citations 
that I have made upon the subject, but I apprehend there will be no question raised by 
my friends but the authorities I have cited are the law, not only of Michigan, 
but of most of the States of the Union if not all of them. 

Again, with reference to the intention: “It is the intention with which an act is 
done that constitutes its criminality. The intent and the act must both concur to con¬ 
stitute the crime, and the intent must therefore be true as well as the other material 
facts in the information. The proof may be either by evidence direct or indirect tend¬ 
ing to establish the fact or by inferences of law from facts proven.” 

Tiffany’s Criminal Law, page 408. 

I call your attention to these authorities because of the fact that it seems to me that 
while you are not seemingly governing this case by the strict rules of evidence laid down 
by the authorities, and while possibly it is not necessary that you shall have the best possi- 


224 


ble excuse for your action in expelling amember, they ought to govern you somewhat in 
making up your judgment as well here as they would in a court of justice. Mr. Dakin 
can be expelled beyond any possible question whether or not he has committed a 
crime under the Constitution. If in your judgment you think he should be expelled 
from his seat upon the floor of this House for any offense, or for anything you may 
deem an offense, it is within the province of this Legislature, and by a two-thirds vote 
they can carry out any design they may have on this man or any other of its members. 

I have the honor of knowing personally many members of this Legislature, and I 
know it would be a tedious thing if I should undertake to read to them the evidence 
that has been submitted in this case, or even briefly call attention to it, because it must 
occur to you that there is only one question of vital importance to consider, and that is^ 
from the surrounding facts and circumstances has Milo H. Dakin been guilty of such 
malfeasance, misfeasance or venal conduct in office that should entitle him to be 
deprived of his seat. 

Some of you, I apprehend, will say that Mr. Dakin is too foolish a man, too silly a 
man, to be entitled to a seat upon the floor of this House, but if you argue \vith your¬ 
selves in that line of reasoning for a moment, permit me to again call 
your attention to the constitution, which provides that a man sent 
here with his infirmities or his condition known to his constituents, it 
is not a sufficient cause, after he has taken the oath and been sworn in and taken his 
seat, for removal; in other words if the Saginaw Valley should send down here from 
every one of its representative districts imbeciles, and they knowing them to be such, 
having taken the oath of office and their seats upon the floor of this House, that would 
not, under the constitution of Michigan, be sufficient grounds for you to expel them 
from their seats. The people know whom they send here, or are supposed to, and 
in their sovereign capacity they have a right to make the selection, so long as the man 
who is elected can take the constitutional oath of office. That is all that can be re¬ 
quired of him, and he is entitled to his seat, whether he be imbecile or gifted with 
one of the most brilliant minds in the State of Michigan. < 

My friend also calls attention to one of Saginaw’s citizens and savs that there is where 
the criminal is, and he refers to Mayor Shackleton of Saginaw City. I do not know 
but what everything he says is true about Mayor Shackleton, but I submit that my 
learned friend is not talking from the evidence in this case when he makes that deduc¬ 
tion or that statement from it. It is not warranted by the evidence. I am not here to 
defend Mayor Shakleton, I am not interested in his case, except so far as I believe he 
is entitled to my protection as he is to the protection of every good citizen ; but I insist 
that my friend goes far out of the way to pay that sort of a compliment that the records 
show he did in his speech to the mayor of Saginaw City. What has Mayor Shackelton 
got to do with Mlo H. Dakin, even suppose he is as rotten as my friend says he is, to 
the very core ? Is Milo H. Dakin responsible for it ? I apprehend not. My learned friend 
talked about Mayor Shackleton, talked about the educational advantages of Michigan a 
great deal more than he did about Milo H. Dakin. Where is the word uttered, except 
when he said there is a cloud hanging over the capitol building to-day, that would in any 
way insinuate or intimate that it rested on the shoulders of Milo H. Dakin. I did 
not detect it in his speech, and if we were to look into his heart we could not detect it 
there. I believe Representative Snow is a scrupulously honest man, as is every one of 
the immortal fifteen with whom I have the honor to be acquainted. 

They are candid men and they are honest man. They have had their feelings hurt 





225 


and wounded and injured no doubt, but I ask them, in the cool evening of their delib¬ 
erations and their judgment, will you visit your spite and your animosity upon Milo H. 
Dakin, or will you coolly consider the facts and evidence and treat this case as you 
would the case of any other man if he has offended, treat it as you believe on your 
oaths it deserves and then impose the punishment, if at all. Does it not appear to you 
from the evidence as though Milo H. Dakin was being pursued not as a 
criminal but because somebody is undertaking to victimize Milo H. Dakin and connect 
him with this transaction in a way that forever will disgrace him ? Does 
it not occur to you by the testimony given by this man Eaton, this man whom it seems 
to me they have resorted to, as the most noxious poisons are sometimes resorted to for 
medicine. I despised that man from the day he took the witness stand, with every drop 
of blood in my body, and it is hardly possible for me to look him in the face or speak 
kindly to him. I cannot do it with any consciousness that I am doing my duty, because 
I believe that that man, in his bitterness of heart, because of his being defeated for the 
renomination as city attorney, or for some bad and wicked reason, is pursuing Milo 
H. Dakin to-day, and this poor man Fellows who has lived so long in the Saginaw 
valley, and borne a most excellent reputation, that they are each being pursued not as 
criminals, but being hunted down as victims of a horrible conspiracy. 

What is the character of the witnesses upon the part of the prosecution, and what is 
the character of the witnesses here upon the defense? Every one of those men, if they are 
honest, have told you on each and every occasion when the question was put to them, 
that they believed that Milo H. Dakin had, from the beginning of their acquaintance 
with him to the present time, sustained universally a reputatiqn for purity of character 
there and honesty in his business transactions, and as a member of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives faithful and honest. 

Now, how is it that he can be followed right down to this very time, and 
you satisfy yourselves that because of some mistake that he made upon this occa¬ 
sion, he deserves the censure that this nian Eaton and others who are prosecuting 
and following him would like to have you visit upon him. I ask you, as members of 
the House, is it not a little strange that Mr. Eaton should be so actively engaged in this 
prosecution unless he has some other motive than a desire to protect the fair name of 
of the Saginaw Valley and the State of Michigan? Does it not look a little remarkable 
that this man should come down here, and that he should make the statement that he 
did upon the witness stand when he was asked about his purpose and his object, when 
he said that he had no bad purpose nor intention in view; and yet he meets this man 
upon the street, and the testimony shows upon their side, without reference to the evi¬ 
dence that comes from the defense, that Milo H. Dakin went into the saloon and sat 
down in that stall, and made those marks at this man’s instance and suggestion. Who 
is responsible for it ? 1 ask you to ask yourselves, would Milo H. Dakin be here to-night, 
would he have made those marks on that roll-call, would he ever have been guilty, 
so far as you know from the evidence in this case, of an offense under the sun, had it 
not been for Frederick L, Eaton ? Is that not true ? Of course it is true, and there is 
no denying it. 

I ask you to contrast the two. Here are these men, Eaton and Milo H. Dakin, stand¬ 
ing up before you in the image of their Creator—I ask you, barring any prejudice, put¬ 
ting that aside, if it is possible for you to do so, to judge between these two men, 
Which has been imposed upon? Which has been outraged? Which has brought this 
disgrace upon the people of the State of Michigan, or at least, which has been the more 
active in bringing this disgrace upon the people of the State of Michigan, and espe- 
29 


226 


cially upon this body. I think you will answer that readily, and there is but one answer 
to make, that Frederic L. Eaton is the man. And when you come to think, members of 
this House, that this is being tried by your honorable body, that you are the prosecutors 
and that we, as humble members of the profession, come in here to contend against the 
able gentlemen you have selected to conduct the prosecution, and then if they see fit 
to contend against us by their votes, it seems to me it is a most extraordinary case and 
one that you should carefully consider and ponder over. It seems to me you cannot 
afford to act hastily, if you have your minds made up from the newspaper reports and 
from rumor and gossip that this man is guilty, you ought to be able, when you announce 
your verdict of guilty to come in here and write it out and say from these facts you 
find him guilty, and from these facts you can satisfy yourselves that he is guilty. Make 
the record clear and clean. 

I have now occupied my time and ask your pardon for the manner in which I have 
addressed you, and trusting and sincerely hoping, yes, praying, that you may do simply 
justice in this case. You would not see me here to-night did I not believe that this man 
has been shamefully outraged and you unpardonably imposed upon by somebody else ; 
and now after you have considered the case you will say as you believe in your con¬ 
science and as though you were sitting upon a jury, sworn under the strict rules of law 
and evidence, to render a verdict according to law and justice, and then you will have 
the satisfaction of having done your duty, and the people of the State of Michigan will 
abide by your verdict. 

SPEECH OF MR. HOLDEN. 

Mr. Speaker and Oentlemen of the Home of Representatives :—This is indeed an al¬ 
most unheard of occurrence, and from the bottom of my heart I wish that it were quite 
unheard of, and that the intelligence and integrity of man were such that they would 
render it impossible that such proceedings could be had by reason of a lack of any 
necessity therefor. It is true that rule six of the procedure in this matter provides 
tliat it shall be in accordance with the practice and rules governing courts of justice, 
and yet permit me, gentlemen, to call your attention to the fact that in a court of jus¬ 
tice twelve men good and true must be called and sworn for the special occasion to give 
a verdict in accordance with the evidence and the law as it shall be given to them by 
the court. 

No prejudiced man, no man who has been injured by the act complained of, can in 
any sense be permitted to sit in judgment; but by reason of the peculiarity of the law 
governing this case, it becomes necessary for the very men who have been injured in 
their feelings, and as they fancy perhaps, in their reputation, to sit in judgment and 
determine, not whether Milo H. Dakin has wronged another, but whether he has 
wronged them. I say under the peculiar law which governs matters of this kind you 
are compelled, if you proceed for the i^urpose of expulsion, to try the offense against 
yourselves ; a course unheard of in any other proceeding upon earth. I call your atten¬ 
tion to this, not that I believe you will act through spite, but because I know that it is 
necessary, when one is heated by a supposed wrong, for him to call to his counsel his 
innermost conscience and cool deliberation, and to say “I, suffering from the injury 
upon which I am sitting in judgment, must be cautious or I will do a wrong, and when 
I have cooled, in future years when I look over the record that I have made to-day in 
my vote upon this matter I will realize most keenly that 

‘ Man’s inhumanity to man 
Makes countless thousands mourn.’ ” 






It is necessary I say, for you to reason with your own consciences in this matter and 
he cautious, upon this charge of wrong doing in Milo H. Dakin, that you shall not act 
indiscreetly. I do not believe you will. I believe that the very position will suggest 
the necessity to each and every one of you to act in such a manner that no person can 
say that you were not calm, dispassionate and just, as far as it is possible for human 
kind to be under like circumstances. Gentlemen, what would you think of the parent, 
when the child has offended, if ho should flog him in anger? 

No! Better that before the parent metes out punishment to the child, he should wait 
until he does not feel the offense of his child against himself; wait until he has cooled, 
and then, tempering justice with mercy, inflict such punishment as cool, dispassionate 
judgment seems to dictate. Only when that is done are the terms “punishment ” and 
“ justice ” synonymous. I realize most keenly, as you must, gentlemen, that while 
you all feel an interest in this matter, there are sixteen members of this honorable body 
that feel it in a double sense : Milo H. Dakin and the fifteen that he has unwittingly 
offended. Now it is competent, I presume, for each one of the sixteen to vote upon 
this question if they will. 

I suggest that in my judgment it is simply a matter of taste upon the part of each 
and every one of those sixteen, a matter of propriety, for them to judge of, and not for 
me. But now that I have called Milo H. Dakin’s attention to his position I should, gen¬ 
tlemen, with all due deference and respect, think it bad taste on liis part if he should 
give the casting vote “ not guilt}’’.” 

What are the charges here ? Two of them are that he solicited money with which to 
corrupt this Legislature, and did it willfully and maliciously. 

They point out the persons from whom he solicited the money: the one, Frederic L. 
Eaton, who came upon the stand here, and in that particular instance, not forgetting 
the solemnity of his oath, he tells you here with uplifted hand, before Almighty God, 
that that charge is not true. When asked by counsel for respondent, “Did Milo H. 
Dakin, on the day named, or at any other time, or at any place on earth, either directly 
or indirectly solicit money of you?” Frederic L. Eaton with all the emphasis of his 
voice, said “ No.” And again, for greater certainty, the question was repeated to him, 
and he said, “ Neither directly nor indirectly has he ever solicited any money from me. 
Dakin says the same, and those two persons are the only ones that God has created who 
can testify to it. Both say no, and no one says yes. That ends that charge, then. 

The other is that he solicited in like manner money from John H. Shackleton. 
Shackleton goes upon the stand and in like solemn manner, and with like emphasis 
says “It is not true.” Dakin says the same. That ends that charge. He stands 
acquitted then under the unanimous proof in this case on those two charges. Aye, he 
stands acquitted on them now without your verdict; for the Supreme Court of this 
State, and of every State in the land that has had occasion to pass upon it, says that 
where the facts are undisputed there is no question to consider. It is settled. 

The other charge is that he willfully and corruptly did, on the nineteenth day of the 
present month, set opposite the names of certain members of the house, certain figures 
indicating sums of money for which they might be bribed or bought. Did he? No! 
He put the figures there, but he did not do it in the spirit in which he is charged with 
doing it. Now, gentlemen, permit me to call your attention carefully to this matter. 
Let me say first, however, that I have heard remarks, perhaps from members of the 
jury, that he ought to be condemned for his foolishness. Gentlemen, that is liable to 
hit almost anyone (outside of the State of Michigan). It is true that Milo H. Dakin 


228 


acted unwisely in the matter. But I say, gentlemen, you that know him as I know 
him and have heard the evidence in this case, have seen him in his simple manners and 
methods here before you, going out and in all during the present legislative session, 
and upon the stand, and many of you in the Legislature preceding, cannot say that he 
acted with an evil design upon one of you. 

How then did it come ? It came in this way : He had offended one person before 
he offended the one hundred gentlemen of this honorable body. How had he done it ? 
He had suggested to certain members of the common council of the city of Saginaw 
where he resides, that a more fit man lived within the city who was capable and willing 
to fill the position which Mr. Eaton then held ; and after seeing Eaton, I think that you 
would kneel in supplication and lift your voices, if you never did before, to the great 
God who made us, and beg of Him, if there is none better or more fit there than Eaton, 
to create one by special means, or otherwise, and place him there. Dakin had sug¬ 
gested the propriety of some other man being the successor of Mr. Eaton as city attor¬ 
ney. Now that was wise, and not otherwise, as every member of this honorable body 
firmly believes, and yet it was an offense against Eaton. In accordance with that sug¬ 
gestion, whether acting from it or not, almost unanimously, perhaps quite so, the 
council of his own politics refused to confirm the nomination of the Mayor. 

He held his position until the mayor who had nominated him, and been rebuked for 
so doing, had ceased to live as mayor, and another one who had been in the council the 
year before, had been elevated by the people of his city to the office of mayor. That 
new mayor (the old alderman), declined to present Mr. Eaton's name for confirmation 
as city attorney, and presented another who was at once confirmed, and became Mr. 
Eaton’s successor in ofiEice. Mad, with all the venom of his soul he swore by the Eter¬ 
nal he would pursue those two and hound them down. “Like a sleuth hound on the 
track he’s at it. ” Men do not do things without motive. Aye, we have proven the 
motive of Frederic L. Eaton, and when he arrived here and entered into conversation 
himself urging the use of money, if we can believe the evidence in this case at all—he 
admits that he talked freely about it—he says that he became startled. Startled; aye, 
startled at the opportunity which he saw to kill three of them at one foul stroke; Dakin, 
and the mayor who had refused to nominate him, and the alderman who had refused 
to confirm him; aye, the city of Saginaw he thought owed him that ofiSce for another 
term, and he has got even with Saginaw by trying to blacken her name. Saginaw will 
live after he is dead and be happy too. 

He says that he was startled. He was, but it was at his golden opportunity that he 
was startled. He tells you it was on account of his own position in the matter. He 
may now well be startled at his own position in the matter. He has got his foot in it 
above the waist in my judgment. He tells you that the next object which influenced 
his course in this matter was to protect the fair name of the members of this Legisla¬ 
ture. How did he get at it ? He tells you himself that he met Milo H. Dakin and got 
him into a saloon in this city. He calls it a restaurant. We do not recognize the dif¬ 
ference especially where both are run in connection. They had something to drink 
there, which it seems was an unusual and unheard of occurrence with Milo H. Dakin, 
that up to half past ten or eleven o’clock that morning he had four drinks of stimulat¬ 
ing fluid. It seemed an unfortunate circumstance that every gentleman who came 
from Saginaw offered to treat Milo until he refused some of them. Eaton was there 
drinking with him, talking with him about the use of money to get the bill through, 
and he said he urged it upon him. 


229 


And now I am going to take Mr. Eaton at his word, for in this he is corroborated. If 
he were not I would not take his own word. It might be unfair to him. He tells you 
that he himself, Eaton, took out of his pocket while he was talking money and the use 
of it in the Legislature here, a roll call of this House, and urged Milo Dakin first to 
check the names of such persons as it was necessary for the delegation to nieet and to 
become acquainted with. He urged Milo to check them ; and how did he get them on 
the record ? Milo commenced naming some in whom he had confidence, though no 
special acquaintance or special friendship at all, yet he had seen them and knew their 
ability, their integrity of character, their influence in the House. But that was not 
sufficient for Eaton. He wanted a list, and he says, “ Don’t name them, take my roll 
call and check opposite their names, Milo, the men that we need to talk with in regard to 
he matters that are nearest our hearts.” And Milo, suspecting no wrong, doing no 
wrong, put against the names of 15 of the good members of this House a check mark. 
Now said Eaton : “Milo, put down oppositefthe names of each of these a figure and 
we will see how much in the aggTegate is necessary to raise a fund here for sociability.” 
And Milo, without the slightest intention on his part, by repeated urging and solicita¬ 
tion, put down the figures. And that is the only wrong Milo H. Dakin has done. 

I have heard persons within this hall condemn him and say he ought to be expelled— 
probably good members of this honorable body—because, when confronted with this he 
went, at your presiding officer’s request, before these 15 men whom Eaton sought to 
ruin along with Dakin, the mayor and aldermen of Saginaw, and made a confession. 
If he had not done that he would have been all right. It may seem stupid on his part. 
It may prove to your minds stupidity; but I tell you, it proves something more, some¬ 
thing better than stupidity. It proves honesty. Had Milo H. Dakin any evil intention 
'when he put the figures there or suspected that he had done any wrong or any injury to 
a friend of his in this House, or any member, or if he had been a cunning rascal like 
the one that had entrapped him, he would have kept still. Then as now, having nothing 
that he wished to cover up, though there are some things he regrets. He told the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And for that wifi you condemn him ? O, 
men, is it true that when one frankly owns that he has done you an injury, tells you 
how he did it, that he is sorry, that you will inflict upon him the greatest punishment 
within your power ? If that is true, how will it reflect upon your own credit ? What 
will you do with the man perchance who acts willfully and then tries to lie out of it. 
Grade your punishments. Reserve something for the scoundrel and not inflict all upon 
the innocent and unsuspecting, even though he has, in his innocence, injured your 
feelings. 

Mr. Eaton said again that he did it for the purpose of saving the reputation of Sag¬ 
inaw and its fair name. He did it to save from reproach the fifty thousand people of 
the Saginaws, heretofore the most happy and still the most prosperous and virtuous of 
any community within the borders of this fair State. He did it in their interest ? Oh, 
my friends. I hate a hypocrite. If there is any crime that is great, it is that of hypoc¬ 
risy. Take them as they are, good people, honest people, influential, happy, prosper¬ 
ous beyond comparison with any other community in this State. How can Eaton save 
their reputation ? Why, by getting the mayor’s name here, and then in his letter saying 
that this was done by the mayor of the city, taking especial pains to point out that it 
was done by the mayor of the city. Oh, gentlemen, take us as we are; then take us as 
we would be if instead of us, fifty thousand Eatons lived there. Oh, if that were so, 
the people that come and go upon the numerous railroads leading into or thi’ough 


230 


those fair cities would hold their noses and in earnest supplication and great suffocation 
beg for some one to burn a rag. (Laughter.) 

I have but a moment more. I ask you to be calm, cool and dispassionate in this 
matter, and remember this as a final illustration. That if I gain the confidence of a 
little child that loves its brother, as Dakin has loved you and yet does, and getting the 
confidence of that child I tell him to take a knife and in an unsuspecting moment thrust 
it through the heart of his brother, who is the murderer, the little child, who loves one 
he has killed, even though he did wrong, having no evil intention upon the object of 
his act, or I? Not the child, but the one alone that suggested the act. I am the mur¬ 
derer, and the child is the martyr. So it is here. Eaton is the one who has disgraced 
you. He is the one that says “Make a mark,” and the mark thereby became his, and 
not that of the unsuspecting tool that he was using with which to make it. It was 
Eaton that said put those fatal figures th^re, and then proclaimed through this world 
the fact that he has done it. He says he did it in your interest and in the interest of the 
fair city which he represents. Place the responsibility where it belongs, but in the name 
of conscience, gentlemen, do not condemn a man here who has heretofore in every office 
of life borne a reputation for integrity, honesty and good faith of which any of you 
might be proud. I appeal to your manhood, honor and your conscience, for your care¬ 
ful consideration of this matter. Do I appeal in vain? 

SPEECH OF MR. CONDUCTOR GOODRICH. 

Mr. Speaker and Members of the Legislature: 

I admire the real cunningness of the two gentlemen who have preceded me, but I 
do not admire so much their logic. The last gentleman upon the floor, although he has 
made an eloquent address upon this occasion, tells you that Mr. Dakin is a fool, and ha 
pictured it out so plainly that I think i)erhaps those who are not acquainted with Mr. 
Dakin will think he really is a fool; and then, in the very next breath, in portraying to 
you this cunning, deceitful, ingenious, bad man, this Mr. Eaton, he tells you that Da¬ 
kin floored that man Eaton to beat him up at Saginaw, and hence Eaton has a grudge 
against him. Oh, what a fool Dakin must be. Consistency is a jewel, they tell me. I 
‘like to see a man consistent in his remarks. He very ingeniously undertook to tell 
these fifteen men who have been brought into disrepute that they better not vote upon 
this occasion. They have been catching at straws all the way through the trial of this 
case, and this is one of their nice little points. 

I admire the gentleman for straining at every point possible in this case. I do not 
see that he has got many. This is one point in the case though. He thinks if he can 
save Mr. Dakin by the failure to secure 67 votes in this House he has accomplished his 
work and you cannot expel him, and he appeals to t e judgment of these fifteen men, 
he intimates strongly, by telling them they had better not vote—he does not tell them 
right out they better not vote, but he tells poor Dakin he hadn’t better vote at all upon 
such an occasion because he is implicated, and he intimates just as strongly to these 
fifteen men as he does to Mr. Dakin that they hadn’t better vote. Why ? Because they 
are implicated too. If anybody has implicated these fifteen men and brought disgrace 
upon these fifteen men I say that that man is this man Dakin, and if it was the last 
vote that I ever cast if I was one of the fifteen men I would cast that vote against Mr. 
Dakin under such circumstances. I want the gentlemen of this House to understand 
it emphatically. While I think I have got just as much sympathy as any man con¬ 
nected with this Legislature, yet, if any man of this Legislature had brought me into 
disrepute, and if I had the right to vote against him, if I believed that he had done so. 


231 


I don’t care whether he was a fool or knave, if he was insane I would not care, I would 
vote against him, and why ? 

I would vote because article 4, section 9 of the constitution gives me the privilege to 
expel a member if he is insane, and because I would not want him here. If the people 
of Saginaw have sent an insane man here, I would say, “We will send him back there 
to you; we have no use for him here.” If they have sent a fool here, I would say by 
my vote, “ We will send him back again, because there is danger of fools falling down 
stairs here and breaking their own necks.” I would send that man back if he was a 
fool or an insane man. If he was a knave and brought me and this Legislature into 
disrepute, I would cast my vote against him and send him back to the place where he 
belongs. That is what I would do. So I hope that the intimation thrown out here by 
the gentleman so cunningly to the fifteen men will not be received by them, but that 
every one of them will vote, and that they will not be excused from voting upon this 
occasion. They are not criminals. If they were arraigned here as criminals there 
would be a reason for their not voting, but they have a right to vote, and I hope these 
men will exercise that privilege and that right. 

Now as to the first gentleman upon the floor I want to say a little in relation to what 
he said in relation to this man Eaton. It seems that all their spite is against this man 
Eaton. My brother Dodge here very eloquently intimated to you and spoke in this 
way that he hated this man Eaton who gave evidence from that stand. He disliked 
him, and the language of my brother Dodge was this, I think : “I have enemity in my 
heart against that man Eaton,” and why ? Brother Dodge has good reason for hatred 
in his heart against this man Eaton. Eaton was too much for Brother Dodge. Law¬ 
yers feel that way sometimes when a witness gets the start of them. I have had those 
feelings myself before now. That is just the way Brother Dodge felt. He hates that 
man Eaton ; but he has no other reason to hate him. I want to say right here, by the 
way, that before the commencement of the trial of this case I had some prejudice 
formed from what I had heard against this man Eaton, but to-day I have no prejudice 
against him at all. I believe, Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of this House, that if there is 
is an honest man in Saginaw or the State of Michigan that Fred L. Eaton is that man. 

Mr. Dodge—Will the gentleman state why he had a prejudice against him. 

Mr. Goodrich—I will before I get through. I will say that I think Fred L. Eaton is an 
exception to the general run of men, in that he dares to do right. Talk to me of that 
man pursuing this man Dakin? For what? What earthly object had he in view- to 
pursue ths man Dakin? Can you tell? I ask you gentlemen of this House, in all can¬ 
dor, can you tell from the evidence that has been adduced here to-day and yesterday 
what object Eaton had or any other of the witnesses here had in pursuing this man 
Dakin? I cannot see for the life of me what object they could have had in view. 
They ha*d no earthly object to pursue this man. It is not true. On the other hand, the 
testimony given upon the part of the committee appointed by this House to try this 
case corroborated the evidence given by Mr. Eaton. The gentlemen upon the other 
side say that Mr. Eaton was continually pursuing Mr. Dakin. Take Mr. Smith’s state¬ 
ment. He says when they came up here to the capitol and met below in the lower hall 
that about the first thing that was said was that Dakin began to talk about the mayor 
going up to Saginaw, for what ? To see something about the charter and “to bring 
some money down or send it down.” 

He had gone up there for that purpose, and nothing would be done until the mayor 
got back, with what ? With the money. They were anxiously waiting for the money. 


232 


Did Mr. Eaton say one word in the presence of Mr. Smith about this money, about pay¬ 
ing him a single cent? No. But Mr. Dakin approaches him and says that the mayor 
has gone up there and there will be nothing done about the charter—no, not a thing 
done about it—until the mayor gets back \vith the money, and then the thing will move 
forward, and everything will work right. He has gone up for that purpose, to regulate 
things a little up there and bring back some money. Does that show that Mr. Eaton 
was pursuing this man and trying to get him to fix amounts against men’s names, and 
trying to make him a briber, or anything of that kind? 

Now, after Mr. Dakin leaves the capitol in company with this other fellow—Fel¬ 
lows—this man above all others I have utter contempt for, and I am not going to say 
much about that gentleman. From what I have seen of that man, Mr. Speaker, and 
gentlemen of this House, the very worst wish that I have against that man who has 
become so low (perhaps it is not bad enough), is that I would just ask him that he pass 
through the same sentence that was passed upon the serpent in the garden of Eden. 
That is all I would care to say about this man. A man that will get so low as to become 
a perfect dead beat, and then try to act in harmony with others who are in power and 
in authority, I have utter contempt for him. That is all I care to say about this man 
Fellows. He is a good deal like the mayor up at Saginaw, only he knows more than 
the mayor, and that is the only difference between them. 

Pursuing this man Dakin? We find him going from the capitol down town, and on 
the corner near Washington St. and Michigan Ave. we find them meeting another gen¬ 
tleman from Saginaw, Mr. Crowley, a respectable citizen. Let me say right here, by 
the way, if these gentlemen think these men are not credible men, think that Mr. 
Eaton IS not to be credited, and Mr. Crowley and Mr. Smith, and Mr. Tillotson, why in 
the name of common sense didn’t they bring men down from the city of Saginaw and 
impeach these men, at least Mr. Eaton ? They could not do it, they do not dare to make 
the attempt. Yes, they did try it, they made the attempt, and I am going to tell you 
pretty quick how they made the attempt. But they met Mr. Crowley down on the cor¬ 
ner of the two main streets here in the city and the first thing that Dakin does, in com¬ 
pany with this man Fellows, is to talk with this honored and respected citizen, Mr. 
Crowley, against whom there is not the least suspicion, and they did not dare to raise a 
suspicion against that man. 

They talked with him about what? Why, about money. They are pursuing this 
man Eaton and this man Crowley all the while, hounding them to death, abouh what ? 
About money. They have got to have money. The very first thing was, “ We want 
some money. We can’t do anything without the money.” And when the question was 
asked by this respected citizen, as it had been previously asked by Mr. Eaton, “ What 
in the world do you want to do with money ? Is it possible for you to use money 
in the Legislature of the State of Michigan? Is it possible for you to use money among 
the members of that Legislature?” Mr. Dakin says, “Why, of course it is.” They 
agree upon this matter. Why didn’t they attempt to dispute Mr. Crowley when he 
made this statement. They didn’t even ask him if he was not mistaken; they didn’t 
dare to do it, because they knew that he was telling the truth. “ Why,” this Mr. Dakin 
says, “of course we can use money among the members of the Legislature.” He did 
not pretend that he could use it in the committee at all, but he could use it among the 
members, and to excuse himself says that he meant in a social way. Perhaps he used 
that term then and there; I care not how he used it, if he used it at all, which we be¬ 
lieve, and are bound to believe that he did, he did a wrong, and he should be held re- 


233 


sponsible for that wrong, because by doing so he disgraced the members of this House 
and the members of the Legislature of the' State of Michigan. 

To pursue this a little further, they say these fellows are all the while and continually 
pursuing Dakin. Mr. Smith says that Dakin and Fellows were the first ones that men¬ 
tioned this money business. The next man that we find that says anything about it is 
Mr. Tillotson, an honest, honorable, pure man, and he says the same thing too, and tells 
what Mr. Dakin confesses that he did do. Now, I say that there are four men who 
stand against this man and say that he did try to solicit money. The gentleman says 
Mr. Eaton did not claim that he tried to solicit any from him, but when the question 
was asked Mr. Eaton upon the stand here “Did he try to solicit any money from you,” 
my friend Dodge got the question so mixed up and fixed up in such a shape and 
changed it and altered it over and over again to suit himself that then Mr. Eaton said 
no. But it is all straight and in harmony. 

Mr. Dodge—The question was “ directly or indirectly,” and he said no. 

Mr. Goodrich—I say after you got it all fixed up to suit yourself he answered the 
question. They continued to say that this man Dakin was being pursued all the time, 
yet he and Fellows had made an arrangement to get up a big dance. Now I ask you 
in all candor, do you believe that? Do you believe one single word in relation to 
his getting up a big dance at the Eichele House ? I don’t believe it at all, because 
Fellows and Dakin contradict each other. Look at the journal and see how they 
contradict each other. Mr. Dakin said this afternoon that Mr. Fellows said to him, 
wouldn't it be a good idea for us to get up a dance when the money comes, and he 
acquiesced and said he thought it would, for the members of .the House. Mr. Fellows 
said yesterday afternoon upon the witness stand that Mr. Dakin said to him wouldn’t it 
be a good idea for us to get up a dance, clear out the dining room at the Kichele House 
and get up a dance for the members. So you will see they contradict each other. I 
don’t believe they intended to get up a dance at all, but this was made up out of whole 
cloth after they were caught. 

Now in relation to impeachment. I said a little while ago they attempted to impeach 
Mr. Eaton, and in what way ? I have attended a great many courts in my life and I 
never saw the attempt made before in the way they did it. They put one of our most 
respected members of this House upon the stand yesterday to impeach Mr. Eaton, and 
how did they do it and what did it amount to ? You heard the statement of Mr Green 
qpon the witness stand. The intent was to impeach the statements of Mr. Eaton. They 
proved that Mr. Green was once introduced or introduced himself to Mr. Eaton, and 
there was the end of the impeachment in that direction. 

Mr. Dodge—There is no evidence of that. He said there was no introduction, that 
they met and each one recognized the other. 

Mr. Goodrich—Wasn’t he asked the question afterwards if he was sure he had not 
introduced himself ? 

Mr. Dodge—I don’t know as to that. 

Mr. Goodrich—You better look and see. Now I say gentlemen of the House, that 
that is all that attempt amounted to to impeach Mr. Eaton. To-day they made a more 
bold attempt. They say, “We have got him now.” They didn’t dare to bring from 
Saginaw, his native home as it were, respectable men who are acquainted with his con¬ 
duct and reputation for truth and veracity in that locality, they did not dare to bring 
that kind of men here, but they say, “ Now we have got him. We have got a Lansing 
man here that can impeach him sure.” 

30 


234 


They bring up here a blind man, who swears that he believes he saw Mr. Eaton a 
week ago last Monday, or two weeks ago last Monday. But Mr. Eaton proved to this 
Legislature that he was not here in Lansing at all upon that occasion, upon any of those 
days. And yet they bring this old blind man upon the stand and ask him to impeach 
this witness. He says three of them came into his office, why he did not know, they 
walked right into his office in broad daylight and sat down there, they had no earthly 
errand, they had nothing to do with him at all, they came right in there and occupied 
his chair and began talking about this man Dakin, and this blind man, who could not 
see only just one of them and that was that man Eaton, gives evidence as to what was 
said. Do you believe this bosh ? I say it is one of the w^eakest attempts to impeach a 
witness that I ever heard of, and this House ought to sit down on such actions, and I 
believe they will. 

The first gentleman on the floor said that the press had passed their verdict and judg¬ 
ment uj^on Milo H. Dakin, and that many of the members of this House and many 
others had passed their judgment upon Milo H. Dakin, and he thought it was all wrong. 
They had the right, I say, to pass that sentence after viewing, as they did, his open 
confession. They did pass it and I believe they will retain it. 

Mr. Dodge—What is the object of this trial? 

Mr. Goodrich—They do try people sometimes whom they know are guilty. Some¬ 
times they cannot get jurors to try a case because everybody in the community knows 
that the respondent brought before the court is guilty and they have to remove the case 
away off to some other place, simply because everybody knows it. But in such a case 
as this we claim the right to try him. We say that if he has brought disgrace and dis¬ 
repute upon the members of this Legislature we have a right to try him. 

And now, as my time is limited, I want to say to you,gentlemen of this House, that I have 
not dilated upon the evidence half as much as I would like to do. I have not presented 
this case with as much vigor and force as I would like to have done. It is because the 
time is so limited. But there is one duty for me to perform, and I shall perform that 
duty faithfully and honestly. It is this, that I am going to stand by these 15 men who 
have been more particularly disgraced than any others in this House of Representatives, 
and I am going to stand by that man who is my colleague, who is from my own county 
who has been brought into disrepute. Sooner let my tongue cleave to the roof of my 
mouth, sooner let me become palsied than I should say that I will not stand up for that 
man whom we know to be pure and honest. We know him in Ottawa county, and I 
say that by the grace of God and by the stamina and force that is within me I will 
stand by that man and see that his fair name and his reputation shall not be defamed 
by letting this man Dakin go scot free. 

And what I would do for him I would do for the rest of these fifteen men. I will 
stand by them. This man Dakin has brought a stain upon the names of these fifteen 
men that will follow them. There is not a member in this House but that feels for 
them. There is not a member in this House that would have the stain that has been 
placed upon these men placed upon himself. It is not a stain to those who know them, 
they do not believe any such thing, but I say there is no man in this House to-night 
who would have the imputation resting upon him that these men have upon them for 
one thousand or two thousand dollar, unless it is Fellows or the mayor from the city of 
Saginaw, or some such man. They might have it for one or tvyo thousand dollars, but 
reputable men would not. There is not money enough in Michigan to hire me to say 
“ Goodrich take that stain upon yourself.” And when I think of this I say it is my 


235 


duty, as a member of this House, to stand in defense of my worthy colleagues and of 
the fourteen others who are among the very best members of this House. This will be 
the last time that I shall talk upon this subject. 

If this case is held over until to-morrow I shall not say a single word upon the sub¬ 
ject further. But I say to you, gentlemen, that I know how I shall vote. I have made up 
my mind candidly and honestly and squarely, and it is your duty to make up your 
mind. \ou have no right to so let feeling carry you away as to say that Mr. 
Dakin is more sinned against than sinning, you have no right to say this. If he has 
brought disrepute upon this House, if he has brought disgrace upon this House, that is 
being published all over the State of Michigan against the members of this House and 
published all over the United States, expel him. 

Mr. Dodge—With the Speaker’s permission I will read the testimony referred to by 
the gentleman. 

Q. Did Mr. Dakin ever ask you for any money ? 

A. When ? 

Q. Did he ever ask you for any money ? 

A. Except as I have testified to-day he never did. 

Q. You know that that is not a proper answer. I cannot remember what you testified 
to as you can, but will you please answer me, yes or no, whether or not Mr. Dakin ever 
asked you for any money on earth ? 

A. No, sir, he never did. 

Q. Directly or indirectly ? 

A. Directly or indirectly. 

SPEECH OF JUDGE VAN ZILE. 

Mr. Speaker and Gentlemen of the House of Representatives : 

• I come to the argument of this case with one fa(;t I think established beyond any 
question, that my brother who has just preceded me has succeeded, beyond any doubt, 
in convincing one of the jurors that my client is guilty, and that the honorable gentle¬ 
man himself. In the time allotted me it will be impossible for me to argue this case 
that has taken two or three days to produce the evidence, and I shall not attempt to 
take it up and argue it step by step and charge by charge, or even answer all of the 
arguments of my friends upon the other side. 

There is one thing, however, that my attention is called to at every step, at every 
sentence, at the close of every proposition that these gentlemen have made upon the 
other side of this case, and that is rule No. 6 that this House adopted, and I come back 
to that rule at this time in the argument, for it is still binding upon counsel. It is 
binding upon the members of this House. It is the law by which this ‘ case is to be 
tried. That rule is that all the rules legal and usual governing cases of law in courts of 
record of this State not inconsistent herewith, shall be observed in the conduct of this 
examination. And now I propose, without telling you anything about any contempt 
that I have in my heart, for I have none for any of the witnesses nor any of the 
counsellors, I propose if I can, in the short time that is allotted to me, to stay by the 
law and the evidence in this case and argue it as well as I can, in my weak way like a 
lawyer. 

What is the law that confronts us ? By what authority are we trying this man ? We 
are trying him under one of the articles of the constitution of the great State of Mich¬ 
igan, and in that constitution I read that “ Each House shall choose its own ofiicers, 
determine the rules of its procedure and judge of the qualifications, election, and 


230 


return of its member, and may with the concurrence of two-thirds of all the members 
elect expel a member.” With the concurrence of two-thirds of all the members elect 
you may expel a member. The judiciary of this State, or of any other State, so far as 
I have been able to discover, has never given us any adjudicated cases upon this subject. 
Probably they never will, because there is no appeal to its higher courts ; but here is a 
case where you have preferred articles against this man, where you have solemnly 
written in your journal the indictment upon which he is to be tried. It is somewhat in 
the nature of an impeachment trial, and therefore I had only to go back and hunt out 
rules that govern the trial of impeachment for a definition of those propositions and 
those facts that we have to present in this case. It is something in the nature of an 
impeachment. You are sitting here as a court. The honorable gentleman who has just 
preceded me told you that you sat as a jury. Yea, as a jury, you do sit, and you sit as 
a court. It is something then in the nature of a court of impeachment. I shall turn now 
with your permission to some of the language that is used by one of the greatest jurists 
that has ever lived in this country and read what he said with reference to the court of 
impeachment. 

I read to you from Story on the Constitution, page 527: 

“ Section 743. Upon the subject of impeachments something has already been said, 
in treating of that branch of the Constitution which delegates to the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives the sole power of impeachment. Upon the propriety of delegating the power 
it is unnecessary to enlarge. But the next inquiry naturally presented is, by what tri¬ 
bunal shall an impeachment be tried ? It is obviously incorrect in theory, and against 
the general principles of justice, that the same tribunal should at once be the accusers 
and the judgers; that they should first decide upon the verity of the accusation and 
then try the offenders. The first object in the administration of justice is, or ought to 
be, to secure an impartial trial. This is so fundamental a rule in all republican govern¬ 
ments that it can require little reason to support it; and the only surprise is that it 
could ever have been overlooked.” 

I read further: 

“ Section 745. The great objects to be attained in this election of a tribunal for 
the trial of impeachments are impartiality, integrity, intelligence and independence. 
If either of these is wanting the trial must be radically imperfect. To insure 
impartiality the body must be in some degree removed from the popular power 
and passions, from the influence of sectional prejudice, and from the more dangerous 
influence of near party spirit. To secure integrity there must be a lofty sense of duty 
and a deep responsibility to future times as well as to God. To secure intelligence 
there must be age, experience, and high intellectual powers as well as attainments. To 
secure independence there must be numbers as well as talents and a confidence result¬ 
ing at once from permanency of place and dignity of station and enlightened patriot¬ 
ism.” 

Now gentlemen, with these ideas of this great jurist in your minds, I come to this 
case asking you to lay aside all prejudice, asking you to lay aside all your feelings of 
malice, if you have any, and I hope there is not a member here that has any, I ask you 
to approach this impartially. I invoke the great rule that was laid down by the meek 
and lowly One, do unto this man as you would that he should do unto you. Give to 
his case that impartiality, that integrity, that intelligence, and all that goes to make up 
that patriotic citizen who should sit and try a man who is charged with an offense I 
have no doubt that you will undertake to do that. 


237 


I have not found one single scintilla of evidence that proves one single charge that 
these gentlemen have made against this man Mr. Dakin. You may talk about your 
glittering generalities. You may talk about his venal corruption, as my friend says, 
you may talk about this and that and the other in your general way, but you have 
made a charge here, and by those charges as legislators you should try this man accord¬ 
ing to the law and according to the evidence, and if you will do that and strip it of 
everything else, I shall leave this case content to know that it must result, even though 
my friend has convinced himself, it must result in favor of my client. 

First, it is not the recitals nor the preamble that precedes these charges upon which 
this man is to be tried. The entire opening of the gentleman (Mr. Goodrich) was upon 
that preamble. I call the attention of the gentleman who shall follow me, and I know 
not which one it will be, to the charges one by one, and I now challenge him or any 
other gentleman upon the opposite side of this case to show me the proof where one 
single one of these charges is proven. We are only here to answer the charges. 
We are not here to say that this man’s feelings have been wrought upon, that 
this man may possibly have been slandered or that a libel has been written. 
You have not yet the jurisdiction to try slanders and libels. You come here with 
charges specific. Why, it has been rung in our ears from the commencement of 
this trial to the present hour. “The specific charge No. 1. Article No. 1 of the 
specific charges,” and by the specific charges I ask you to try this man. It is article 1, 
2, 3 and 4 in which you have laid this case. There is no violation of the constitution. 
You have omitted it. You struck it out of your charges. W^e came up here to defene# 
against that, but on the eve of the commencement of this trial you struck it out. There 
is no unlawful act. You say there is none by the charges. What else is there? It is 
that he corruptly solicited money, that he corruptly received money, that he corruptly 
made a list, and that word corruptly if the key note, it is the key stone that upholds 
these charges, and I say to you that it is as necessary to in'ove that he corruptly did 
this as it is to prove that he did it at all. 

What is the corruption? Let us turn to the law writers and read the definition. “Cor¬ 
ruption, an act done with an intent.” That is what corruj^tion is. An act done with 
an intent to gain some advantage inconsistent with an official duty and the rights of 
others. Then I go back to this rule, that these gentlemen must prove before you, gentle- 
- men of the jury, they must prove it before v ou, that this man intentionally did these 
things as they have charged; and had they left out the word corruption and put in the 
word intention it would have been charged exactly the same. 

What are the charges? lhat he corruptly received money of Mayor Shackleton. 
My brother who preceded me and opened this case seems to have abandoned that. 
There certainly is no proof of it. That he corruptly received money from Mayor 
Shackleton to corruptly use with the members. 

The second charge they say is proven beyond any question, that he corruptly solicited 
money of Shackleton and Eaton, ostensibly for corrupt uses. That he made a list of 
names, that he corruptly represented to Eaton that to secure the vote and influence of 
members it would be necessary to use with each member certain amounts of money. 
Now, gentlemen, where is the proof in this case, and in the name of justice, and in the 
name of the common law, in the name of the great and prosperous State about which 
we have heard so much, in the name of the grandeur of the Saginaw Valley, are we to 
condemn this man unless we can point out the truth. I have not read to you all of that 
article of the constitution. That article of the constitution not only requires that you 


238 


should vote upon this, but it requires that if you should put your seal upon this man’s 
destiny for the future by expelling him from this House of Re[)resentatives, that you 
shall write the reasons upon your journal and sign your names. And when you write 
upon your journal that you have expelled this man Milo H. Dakin from this House, if 
you should write it, you will write down the reasons, and when you take the pen to 
write the reasons or sign the reasons that are written, ask your consciences in the name 
of God and in the name of justice, where is the truth that this man intentionally did 
one single thing that is charged here against him. 

Where did he intend to spend money with the members of the Legislature V Where is 
it that he wrote a list, that he has said or intended to say he could corruptly use money, 
as the articles read, with each one of those members ? If you cannot find it you should 
never write in the journals of the Legislature of the great State of Michigan those rea¬ 
sons. Write them plainly, write them that they may be read in the light of God’s justice, 
write them that they may be read in the light of your own consciences, write them 
that they may be read and go down in the history of this grand State of ours that those 
were reasons coming from the conscience, convinced by the proof and by the law, and 
not, gentlemen of the jury, that you were convinced or moved because of harangue 
or that you were moved because of great glittering generalities. 

The third charge is that Milo H. Dakin, a member of the House of Representatives 
from said First District of Saginaw, did corruptly on the 19th day of April, 1887, make 
a list of names of certain members of the House of Representatives of the State of 
Michfgan, together with the amounts of money'necessary to procure the votes and iiifiu- 
ence of said members—not that he made a list of any other thing, but that he made a 
list with the amounts of money necessary to procure the votes and influence, not of 
those men generally, but of each individual man that is in that list. Now where is the 
proof of that ? I say to you without fear of contradiction that there is not a single wit¬ 
ness who has taken the stand in this case from the commencement to the end of it that 
has pretended that Milo H. Dakin said that he could procure the influence of each one 
of those members by giving to him that amount of money. And this is further a part 
of the same charge : “ That the said Milo H. Dakin did represent to the said Frederic 

L. Eaton of Saginaw, that to secure the votes and influence of said members it would 
be necessary to use with each of them the amount of money set opposite their names.'’ 

My friends say that this charge is made out. Why, gentlemen of the jury. I appeaL 
to the lawyers of this House, I lay it before the lawyers of this House - and there are 
some good ones in it too, thank God !—I lay this proposition before the lawyers of this 
House, that if this case had closed in a court of justice I could go to the judge of the 
court and move that the defendant be discharged because there was no evidence against 
him, under the charges that you have made, and will you try him upon any other 
charges than those you have made ? Are we here to answer anything else than that ? 
If we are, please tell us what the charges are and give us a half chance at least to put 
in some more proof. Writh your charges upon, the Journal, because following these 
charges you must write what your findings are and the reasons for them. 

I find that I must hurry on. Look at the silly nonsense of the proposition. Milo H. 
Dakin swears that he has the utmost respect for these gentlejnen that he made a list of. 
The men upon the list are men he respects above all others, and I know from the gen¬ 
tlemen’s names that are written here something about that. It is only necessary to 
repeat the proposition to show that it is the purest piece of nonsense that ever graced a 
record to say that Milo H. Dakin ever thought that he could take this amount of money 


239 


that he wrote opposite the names of each of these individuals and influence the vote of 
that man with it. The idea that he could approach such men as my worthy friend who 
sits before me, the Honorable T. H. Williams, that he could buy his vote or influence 
in this House for the paltry sum of $10, or any other sum of money, or that he could 
take my honored friend Mr. Rumsey and buy his vote with the amount he has placed 
opposite his name. Do you think that Milo H. Dakin intended, or that he ever con¬ 
ceived that idea or entertained any such idea, or is it necessary for me to criticize the 
truth, yes the truth we will call it, that has been criticized by gentlemen, that Mr. 
Eaton or any other witness in this case has convinced you that that was his intention or 
idea. But that is the charge upon which he is to be tried. 

There is one other thing in this case that is peculiar, and I speak of it not for the sake 
of casting any stigma or saying any hard thing about any witness in this case. I do 
not desire to do that. I have practiced law a few years and I have never found it nec¬ 
essary to stigmatize a single witness; but I want to argue this case; I want to draw the 
picture of this case as it actually is. Will you go with me to the place where this ter- 
tible occurrence was, terrible in the mind of my friend, and really it is terrible. Let 
follow these men and see who they were. Here is Milo H. Dakin, one of them, the 
principal man in the case. I read in the little red book sent me by the Secretary of 
State the history of that man. The manual of the State of Michigan contains it, and I 
hear from the lips of the other actor in that scene at that saloon the history of that 
man who sat by the side of him. I draw for you the picture. I ask you to look upon 
it. It has been drawn before you in the proof and now I would hold it up to you and I 
would stamp it upon your minds so that it will not be effaced when you vote upon this 
subject. 

There sits the graduate, there sits the astute lawyer, there sits the man who is so 
startled that he is urging this man Dakin to do what would startle liim worse than any¬ 
thing that had occurred to startle him, and there on the other side |^ts Milo H. Dakin, 
a hard working laboring man, without education, without pretense of education, and 
possibly not the greatest statesman either that ever graced the hall of the House of 
Representatives — there he sits, and this wily man asks him those questions, to name 
these members, name them, Mr. Dakin, name them. Mr. Dakin stops and hesitates. 
O, there is Mr. A., there is Mr. B. “Go on, Mr. Dakin, go on, you have startled me 
upon the street, startle me some more. Go on, I urge you to name the names ; go on.” 
He does not go on; and in a great flurry he goes dowm in his pocket or his diary and he 
takes out a roll of the members of this House. “ Now, Mr. Dakin, if you cannot think 
of the names, take this pencil and mark opposite each name a check,” For what? 
Not to check off the names of the members that you think you can buy for dollars and 
cents, not that; but, Mr. Dakin, mark off by a check mark opposite each one of those 
names the names of the members that you would desire the most of all to associate 
with in a social way. That is it. Mark off on that list, Mr. Dakin, the dearest and best 
friends you have got or would be glad to have, in this Legislature. Mark off those 
•names that you would consider it an honor to sit by their side or be in their society, Mr. 
Dakin. And he marks them off. And what for? That he might enteriain them 
socially. And that is all the proof there is. 

Hold that up, gentlemen of the jury, I ask you by the side of that which is recorded 
in this case, that Dakin with a wicked, perverse mind intended to corrupt this Legisla¬ 
ture and to receive money for corrupt purposes. Mark them off, Mr. Dakin, says this 
gentleman, this lawyer, this college-bred man. mark them off. And he did mark 


240 


them off. Not that he could bribe them, not that he could influence them. That was 
not the proposition yet made. Now, Mr. Dakin, place upon this roll call opposite those 
names the amounts that you think you ought to have to give these gentlemen this 
social entertainment, or to use among them in a social way. There was not a single 
word that escaped the lips of Mr. Dakin. There was not a single intimation that came 
into his mind thus far nor even after that slip had unfortunately gone into the hands 
of a man who would betray him as Judas betrayed his master. Up to that time not a 
single word or sentiment of that kind had escaped him. But he did mark down the 
amounts, and in the way that I have pictured it, not with the intention of corrupting 
any single member of this Legislature. And then he took that list and put it in liis 
pocket and before they got up to go it was that this man, not willing to leave the list 
with him, said “ Give me the list.” 

And Dakin gave it to him, not knowing, as he swore upon the stand, and I believe 
every word he said, that there was anything wrong done. He is an honest man, sworn 
to be so by everybody. Not a man has said anything to the contrary. And then that 
man Eaton took that list and went out, and he brooded over it, aye, he laughed over 
it, and in his pocket he knew that he had that that might be used, and until Dakin had 
met a friend indeed he never dreamed that it was wrong, and when he undertook to get 
it back he could not. This man who had been so startled was afraid to give it up. 
Suppose I should draw the picture of one of my friends in this House, if it is possible 
that such a thing can occur between us, and he should undertake to mark off such a 
list in my presence, what would you expect of me ? I would put my hand upon his 
shoulder and say, Do not do that any more; tear it up.” Gentlemen, did this learned 
graduate from the college, this astute lawyer do that ? No, he never, from the begin¬ 
ning to the end thought he should do such a thing as that. He never called a halt, 
although he said that he gave it to the Speaker of the House of Representatives be¬ 
cause he thought a halt ought to be called in this kind of a thing. Why did he not 
call the halt before it went into the public press, and before we had this trial in this 
House. 

But my time is nearly up. As I said you have to write in .this .journal of yours the 
reasons why if you say that tliis man must be found guilty and punished. Write it 
with a second sober thought if you write it at all. If you say by your verdict in this 
House that my friends and my opponents here in the trial of this case, who have prose¬ 
cuted this man so zealously are right, write it that it may be read by the generations 
that are to come, not in hot blood, not in excitement, not by being prodded on by 
harangues and glittering generalities, but write it with a second sober thought, with a 
reason that comports every word, every sentence, every sentiment with the law and 
the evidence that was given. Write it gentlemen of the jury, if you should write it all, 
write it with the beneficent mercies of God Almighty shining down into your hearts ; 
write it from your consciences : write it in the name of justice ; write it in the name of 
the great and beneficent laws of this land ; write it because you can defend every 
single word of it and be sure that there is not a sentiment welling up in the hearts of a 
single individual of you that is prompted by anything like malice or ill-feeling or by 
anything different from what I have undertaken in this my weak way to picture to 
you, in the name of justice tempered by the mercies of God. 

SPEECH OF MR. DIEKEMA. 

Mr. speaker and Members of the Home of Representatives : 

This is indeed a very trying position that I am now about to occupy in closing the 


241 


discussion upon this case. Michigan has always pointed with pride to the incorrupti¬ 
bility of her legislators. Rumor has it that other Legislatures have been bought for 
money, but the confidence of the people of the State of Michigan has never yet been 
shaken in the integrity of her law-makers. During the past week, however, the leading 
newspapers of the land have pointed with significant pride to the fact that while great 
sums have bribed their Legislatures, Michigan this year had a very cheap House of 
Representatives. This cloud is hanging over us, and we have taken three whole days 
to let the sunlight of truth shine in upon the matter in the most public way. I feel 
that it is a trying position for the members of this House to sit in judgment over a 
fellow member ; but I congratulate Mr. Dakin that he is in the hands of his friends. 
For through our intercourse here this winter ties of friendship have been formed that 
unite us all together ; but friends they are whose sense of justice and responsibility to 
God and State and home, rises high above all prejudice and above all feeling. This 
House, if it had not desired to treat this matter considerately, coolly and deliberately, 
as has been suggested, might have rushed through a resolution expelling this member 
the first evening when this matter was exploded ; but in our sense of justice we have 
given him a public trial, we have allowed every one of those who must finally sit in 
judgment upon him to listen to the evidence, to see every witness. We have allowed 
the ablest attorneys in the State to stand before us in defense of this man for three long 
days, and we have this evening listened to their eloquent arguments. 

It seems to me that no one could now say to this Legislature that we* have been hasty 
in the matter. I for one could not soe how we could have been more calm and deliber¬ 
ate, and I enter into the discussion of this subject this evening with no feeling of hatred 
toward Mr. Dakin, rather with feelings of sympathy; but I feel that the dignity and 
honor of the House of Representatives of the State of Michigan is at stake, and no one 
man, liowever sorry I may be for him, can or may cast a blot upon its fair fame. 

I desire as my brother who has gone before me said he would do, to discuss this mat¬ 
ter as a lawyer and upon the evidence. And I desire to show you that Mr. Dakin is 
guilty under the second and third articles of these charges that we have preferred 
against him. 

Article 2 reads as follows: 

ARTICLE II. 

“That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from said first 
representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the higli duties of his office, and 
of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of April, A. D. 1887, and on divers 
other days and times, between the day of taking his said oath of office and the preferring 
of said charges, solicit and endeavor to procure money from said John H. Shakeltoii, 
mayor of Saginaw City, from Frederic L. Eaton of Saginaw, and from various other 
persons for the purpose ostensibly of corruptly using such money among the members 
of the House of Representatives of the Michigan State Legislature, to influence their 
votes in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw City, then pend¬ 
ing before the committees on labor interests and municipal corporations of said House 
of Representatives, but in fact for the purpose of corruptly and unlawfully appropriat¬ 
ing all or a part of such money for his own personal use and benefit.” 

Allow me to say that I find him guilty under this article, in the light of the evidence 
that is before us. I shall not discuss the evidence of Mr. Eaton. It stands plain and 
clear before the minds of all of you. He says that when he first came here Mr. Dakin 
was the first man who suggested money to him, and said it was necessary to receive 
money to get the bill through. He said that in the second place, upon the street corner 
Mr. Dakin again broached the matter of money first, and the same thing took place in 
the stall at the Windsor, 
dl 


242 


But, gentlemen, allow me now to discuss the testimony of other witnesses. The sec¬ 
ond witness who was introduced here on the part of the committee prosecuting Mr. 
Dakin was Mr. Jay Smith. I have his testimony here, in very short language. Let me 
read it to you. He says that he stood with Mr. Eaton, Mr. Fellows and Mr. Dakin here 
in the capitol, and this is what he testified to : 

*‘A. I will come to it in a moment. Dakin stated that he expected Mr. Shackelton 
would fetch some money with him, but he only brought a little. He had given him 
some but it did not amount to anything, it was all gone. Mr. Eaton then asked him 
what he wanted to do with the money and he said he wanted to use it in getting the 
charter bill passed the House. Mr. Eaton asked him what the trouble was, whether 
there was any difidculty with the committee or whether he wanted to use the money 
with the members of the House. His answer was that he wanted to use it with the 
members of the House. 

“ Q. Did he say that he wanted to use it with the members of the House for the pur¬ 
pose of getting the charter bill through the House ? Was that the language that he 
used ? 

• ‘ A. Mr. Eaton asked him if he meant to be understood that there were legislators 
■whose votes could be obtained by the use of money. His answer was, ‘ Of course.’ ” 

This is the testimony of Mr. Smith. Have you heard one of the attorneys say a single 
word against this witness ? Has the Hon. Judge Holden in any way suggested that 
Mr. Smith was not an honest, upright man ? Smith, who has lived in the city of Saginaw 
for thirty-fi’C'e years, and with whom Judge Holden is certainly intimately acquainted. 
He has not mentioned even his name. Now, here is a man who has no prejudice 
against Mr. Dakin whatever, a man pure and upright and honest. This is his testi¬ 
mony, and the lawyers of Mr. Dakin do not even make a single remark about it. I ask 
you then, if Mr. Eaton had said nothing and if we had simply the testimony of Mr. 
Smith, whether there is not sufficient proof of guilt ? 

Here is the testimony of Mr. Crowley. Remember Mr. Eaton had not seen Crowley 
at all that morning ; and in Mr. Dakin’s confession before the committee he states that 
Mr. Crowley is an honest man and will make a fair statement. Let us see what fair and 
honest statement Mr. Crowley makes : 

“Q. Did either of them say what they had gone to Saginaw for?” 

This was on the street corner before Eaton had seen Crowley. 

“ A. Yes. I think Mr. Fellows took a document out of his pocket with some writing 
on it and said that Linton and Shackleton had gone to Saginaw to make some arrange¬ 
ments in regard to Florence, that Linton had promised Shackleton that if he would 
agree to some matters in the interest of Florence in regard to some improvements that 
ought to be made upon it provided it came into the City of Saginaw, and pay for some 
improvements already made for Carleton, that he would not interfere with our charter, 
providing Mr. Dakin would assist him in this charter.” 

“ Q. What was said in relation to the mayor’s going there? ” 

“ A. Then I think Mr. Dakin said ‘ We ought to have some money to-day.’ I says 
‘ What to do ? ’ He says, ‘ Well, to work while Linton is away.’ ” 

“ Q. To work at what ? ” 

“A. I don’t know as it was said any more than the supposition was in the interest of 
the charter.” 

Here is the testimony of Mr. Crowley. The first man that mentioned money on the 
street corner was Mr. Dakin, and he said, “We ought to have that money to-day to 
work on the charter while Mr. Linton is away.” And when on cross-examination I 
asked Mr. Fellows, “ Were you present when this conversation took place, and did Mr. 
Crowley tell the truth when he said Dakin said “ We ought to have the money to-day, 
while Linton is away,” he replied, “ I remember some conversation of that kind.” 
What were Dakin and Fellows doing that day ^ The Legislature was in session, but they 
were walking up to North Lansing. They were walking about the streets of Lansing. 
They were going to the telegraph office to see whether some money had been tele- 


243 


graphed to them. On this very day, when it was necessary to use money to get the 
charter through, they did not even make their appearance in the House of Representa¬ 
tives. When there was a chance to work honestly with the members, they never once 
appeared. If they put the interpretation upon it that the money was to be used in a 
social manner, that was the day for Mr. Fellows to use the five dollars given to him in 
the morning by the mayor. Dakin had two dollars given to him in the morning, and 
they had seven dollars between them to use on that day for social purposes, if they had 
intended it for any such purpose. But instead of that Mr. Dakin takes out his two dol¬ 
lar bill to-day, and says he has that money yet in his possession. If it was intended for 
•cigars or liquor, it certainly would have been used during the day. But instead of that 
not a single word was said to any member of the House in relation to this charter. So 
much for the testimony of Mr. Crowley upon this subject. 

But I go on still further. Mr. Crowley says towards the close of his examination 

“A. I thought like this. The amount set down oposite those men’s names, footing it 
all together, if that money was raised it would be for the benefit of Mr. Dakin and Mr. 
Fellows and these members would never hear of it. That was my opinion. ” 

Mr. Dakin has said that Mr. Crowley is an honest man and will make a fair state¬ 
ment. Here is his statement: 

Mr. Levi Tillotson happened to come into Lansing that day and you will see that 
Tillotson had no conversation with Eaton at the time, had not seen him. Let us see 
what conversation took place with Tillotson. Here it is; 

‘•Q. Do you remember of having a conversation with Mr. Dakin and Mr. Fellows 
upon that occasion?” 

“A. Yes, sir.” 

“Q. State what the conversation was.” 

“A. I met Mr. Fellows and Mr. Dakin, and after the usual greeting I asked them 
how matters stood in regard to our charter. They said they thought things looked 
very favorable, and that they needed some money to carry it through.'' 

Mr. Tillotson had never breathed the subject of money. Tillotson had not seen Eaton. 
The able attorneys would make you believe tliat Eaton was leading this man on when 
he himself is suggesting money to every Saginaw man he meets upon the street. I will 
read further : 

“ Mr. Holden—I want to know which one said”that.” , 

‘‘ A. Mr. Fellows.” 

Mr. Holden—I object.” 

“ Q. \Vas Mr. Dakin present?” 

“A. Yes, sir.” 

“Q. Proceed.” 

“ A. Mr. Fellows spoke and said that they would have to have some money in order 
to get the matter through, and that Mr. Shackleton had not brought any money down 
to amount to anything. I think he spoke and said about ten dollars, and after a while 
he said that Mr. Shackleton gave him five dollars, and Mr. Dakin two. Then Mr. Dakin 
told me that he had given Mr. Eaton a certain statement or list of names ; that it would 
take money to use to get that charter through. I said to him, “ Mr. Dakin, in the name 
of God, you didn’t do that.” He says, “ I did.” I said, you had better go and have it 
straightened at once, for you will get into trouble.” 

Here is the testimony of three witnesses who are entirely unprejudiced, and with 
whom Mr. Eaton had not had a word of conversation. And I ask you, gentlemen, in 
all sense of honor, why was Dakin suggesting money at every step? I say that he is 
guilty under this charge. No one of us believes—and he himself disavows—that he in¬ 
tended to use it among the members in any way except for that feast at the Eichle 
House, and that matter is so ridiculous that I will not discuss it. 

But it has been suggested that we have not proved that he solicited money. Mr. 


244 


Dakin was'put upon the stand and he used this language: “I expected all of them to- 
furnish it.” 

“ Q. Whom do you mean by them?” 

“ A. Mr. Eaton and Mayor Shakleton.” 

And he mentioned the members of the committee from Saginaw that were present. 
On another occasion he says “I expected the city of Saginaw to furnish it.” Again he 
said that his statement made in the Speaker’s room was true except in one particular, 
and that was the statement that he had not seen Mr. Eaton down below in the capitol. 
Let me read to you then one of the statements that he says is true : 

“ I expected the mayor of Saginaw would raise the money. I expected him to hand 
the money to me. I told Mr. Eaton that he, Eaton, if he had any money could hand it 
to Fellows and I would get the money of Fellows. I do not think it would be wrong 
to take this money even though 1 did not expect to influence votes.” 

Mr. Dakin admits here that he expected money, that he expected it of the mayor, 
and that he expected it of Mr. Eaton and others ; and in proof of that we have intro¬ 
duced testimony that they went to the telegraph office to see whether any money had 
been sent. 

But it has been suggested by the learned counsel that under section nine of article 
four of the constitution we cannot convict until we have proved a crime. He says 
further that this Legislature cannot try a libel. He is evidently, although a very 
learned man, very badly mistaken here. If one of the members libeled another member 
we could at once expel him. 

But do not take my statement upon this article of the constitution. During the con 
stitutional convention of 1867 a very full discussion took place upon this section of 
article four of the constitution. Here is some of the language used by some of the most 
learned men this State has ever had. In the first place Judge Withey, now dead, says : 

“ I believe the only safe rule to be that the Legislature should possess at all times, the 
power to purge itself of improper members.” 

Mark the words, “ improper members ;” of i:)ersons who for any cause, may be unfitted 
to occupy seats in the Legislature. I believe there is no other safe rule than that. 

The question here arose upon striking out the last clause that a man could not be 
expelled again after his constituents had returned him. The reason stated for this was 
that it is thb only protection the people have. They go on to say in the debate that at 
a certain time in the English parliament a man was expelled simply because he held 
liberal views. He was expelled three times, and three times returned by his constitu¬ 
ents, and for that reason it was put into the constitution that a member could not be 
expelled again for the same cause. But there is no limit upon the power of the Legis¬ 
lature in the respect claimed by the learned counsel for the respondent. In expelling 
any member no crime need be shown. Any misconduct upon the floor of the House is 
sufficient if the members think so. 

Let me read to you again anotner statement made by Mr. Vanvelkenburgh : 

“ I think every deliberative body should have the power to protect itself against tjie 
intrusion of men who are unfit to be admitted into that body.” 

And Mr. G. V. N. Lothrop makes statements of the same kind. 

It is very plain and clear from these discussions that these learned men thought that 
there was no limit to the power of the Legislature to inflict this punishment, if it saw 
fit. 

It seems to me that I have made it very clear as a lawyer that under the second of 
these articles we can convict Mr. Dakin. 


245 


But here is article three. I shall not read it. It accuses him of corruptly placing 
opposite the names of certain members certain amounts of money, and in that way 
bringing their good names into disrepute. Nobody can question the fact that their 
good names have been brought into disrepute. Nobody can question the fact in the 
light of the evidence we have that Mr. Dakin did write those figures, and that he had 
been talking to every one about money. After Mr. Eaton asked him “ How much do 
you want?” he could not answer how much. “ With what members do you expect to 
use the money ? ” was the only question that could follow, if he would not state how 
much he wanted. Then he named certain men and stopped again. Then Mr. Eaton 
took out of his diary—he is very plain upon that—this list of names, and he said 
“ Check them off,” and after he had checked seventeen names he asked him again 
“How much money do these seventeen men need?” Then no answer was made. 
Eaton then said “ Place the amounts opposite each name.” And here we have the list. 
And when this afternoon Mr. Dakin was asked “Why these differences, why five 
dollar men and ten dollar men and one twenty-five dollar man, if you only intended to 
have a feast ? ” he said “ I can’t explain it.” 

But here is another fact that we must not forget. Mr. Crowley suggested, “ Mr. 
Rumsey $25.00?” and Mr. Crowley says that Dakin replied, “Yes, and he will be a 
cheap man at that.” 

Can we in any way come to but one conclusion, and that is that he intended to use 
and appropriate this money? No one will for a moment believe that any one of these 
men would have received for a social purpose or otherwise one single cent of this 
money. 

But I will not go so far. I desire to state here that I do not believe that Mr. Dakin 
intended to keep all that money himself, but I believe that this man Fellows who testi¬ 
fied that he had spent thirty dollars above all ordinary expenses during his visit, and 
that he had spent that amount for beer and cigars, was in league with him. And 
when, instead of remaining in this House, where they might have done something in a 
legitimate way, they walked to North Lansing, I believe that all that time this man 
Fellows was suggesting to Dakin and breathing in his ear, “Money, money, money.” 
And listening to those suggestions, there was perhaps but one result, to divide the 
money between Fellows and Dakin. 

I am sorry we cannot punish Fellows. I am also sorry for poor Dakin. God 
knows I am sorry for him; but the reputation of ninety-nine men sitting here in the 
legislature of the State of Michigan should rise high above all feelings of mere sorrow 
for one man. I can do nothing more than to ask every member upon the floor of this 
House to read and weigh carefully the testimony and then, in the discharge of his duty, 
under the oath of office that he took at the beginning of this session, decide whether he 
shall protect the good name of the State of Michigan and of her legislature, or whether 
his sympathies for one man, who himself confesses that he has done wrong, shall mis¬ 
lead him. , 

Mr. Herrii-gt'-n moved that the first of the specific charges against Repre¬ 
sentative Dakin be stricken out. 

Which motion prevailed, two-thirds of all the members elect voting 
therefor. 

Mr. Grenell ofTered the fol owing affidavit and resolution: 

STATE OF MICHIGAN, ) 

County of Ingham, j 

In the matter of arricles exhibited on behalf of the special committee 
House of Rep esentatives of the State of Michigan appointed April 20, 1887, 


246 


against Milo H. Dakin, member of said House of Representatives, from the - 
First Representative District of Saginaw County, in relation to the charges 
made against him, for misfeasance, malfeasance, or venal or corrupt conduct 
in office. 

Milo H. Dakin being duly sworn, deposes and says: I am the same per¬ 
son against whom said articles are exhibited and now pending before said 
House of Representatives. My property consists of a house and lot in the 
city of Saginaw which I purchased some six or seven years ago for the sum 
of 1450 and upon which there is a small mortgage unpaid, and the ordinary 
household goods of a laboring man of the value perhaps of two or three • 
hundred dollars. Said house and lot are occupied by me and my family as a 
homestead, aside from the property above mentioned. I have no property or 
means with which to employ or pay counsel to aid me in my defense against 
said charges. 

I deem it necessary that counsel be employed and paid to aid me in making 
my defense in this matter, and ask that a reasonable appropriation be made 
for that purpose. 


MILO H. DAKIN. 


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 26th day of April, 1887. 

Edwakd 0. Kelley, 

Notary Public, Ingham County. 

Resolved, That the sum of two hundred dollars be and is hereby appropri¬ 
ated for the purpose of enabling Representative Milo H. Dakin to pay 
counsel in defending him from the charges preferred against him for mis¬ 
feasance, malfeasance, or venal or corrupt conduct in office, 

After the reading of which. 

On motion of Mr. Hoaglin, 

The resolution w^s laid on the table. 

Mr. Herrington moved that there be a call of the House, 

"Which motion prevailed. 


PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE CALL. 


The roll of the House was called by the Clerk, and the following members • 
reported absent without leave: Mr. Hill. 

Mr. Herrington moved that the vote on the charges be taken, as under the 
call, with the bar of the House closed. 

"Which motion prevailed. 

The second of the special charges was then read by the Clerk, and 
The Speaker announced the question to be. 

Has the charge been proven. 

The charge was then declared proven by yeas and nays as follows: 


YEA.S. 


Mr. Abbott, 
Allen, 
Anderson, 


Mr. Cole, 


Mr. Killean, 


Mr. Robinson, R.,. 


Ashton, 
Baker, S. 


Baldwin, 

Bardwell. 


Bake/, w! A. 


Crocker, 

Cross, 

Damon, 

Diekema, 

Dillon, 

Dougherty, 

Douglass, 


Kirby, 

Lakey, 

Lincoln, 

Linton, 


Makelim 

Manly, 

McCormick 


Rogers, 

Rounsville, 

Rumsey, 

Simpson, 

Spencer, 

Stuart, 

Thompson, 


247 


Bates, Mr. 

Dunbar, 

Mr. McGregor, Mr. 

Tindall, 

Baumgardner, 

Eldred, 

McKie, 

VanOrthwick, 

Beecher, 

Engleman, 

McMillan, 

Vick ary. 

Bettinger, 

Goodrich, 

Mulvey, 

Vroman, 

Bentley, 

Harper, 

O’Keefe, 

Watson, F. H. 

Breen, 

Haskin, 

Oviatt, 

Watson, H. 

Burr, 

Herrington, 

Perkins, 

Watts, 

Cady, 

Hoaglin, 

Pettit, 

Webber, 

Cannon, 

Hoobler, 

Pierce, 

Williams, T.H. 

Case, 

Houk, 

Preston, 

Williams, W.W. 

Chamberlain, 

Hunt, 

Header, 

Wood, 

Chapell, 

Jones, 

Rentz, 

Speaker, 

Chapman, 

Kelley, 

Robinson,J. W. 

sa 


KAYS. 


Green, Mr. 

Hosford, 

Mr. Powers, Mr. 

Wellman, 

Grenell, 

Ogg, 

Snow, 

Wilson, 

Holt, 

Pardee, 

Washburn, 

11 


Mr. Grenell, when his name was called, said: 

I wish to explain my vote. I find in article two that Mr. Dakin is accused of 
soliciting money from two persons, Mr. Shackleton and Mr. Eaton. I find that in the 
testimony both Mr. Shackleton and Mr. Eaton swear that Mr. Dakin never asked them 
for any money. I therefore vote no. 

Mr. Hosford, when his name was called, said: 

I asl^ leave to explain my vote. It was stated once by a very prominent man that he- 
would rather be right than president. I never expect to have an opportunity to be 
president, but I do expect to have opportunities to do right, and I believe I have one of 
those opportunities this evening. In the vote that I am about to cast I desire at this 
time to disclaim any kind of reflection upon the fifteen distinguished members of this 
body who have been unfortunately connected with this matter. I believe that they are 
men who render high honor to their constituents and high honor to the State, but Mr. 
Speaker, I do not believe that it writes their names any higher upon the roll of honor to 
trample this poor worm Dakin in the dust. I cannot see it in that way, and if I am the 
only member of the House I shall upon this proposition vote no. (Applause.) 

Mr. Ogg, when his name was called, said: 

Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to explain my vote. I do not wish to go into any details,^ 
but for the reasons expressed by my colleagues from Detroit, I vote no. 

Mr. Herrington, when his name was called, said: 

Mr. Speaker, I desire to explain my vote. Having been one of the committee in 
charge of this investigation, I should not have voted if gentlemen had not demanded 
that I should vote. I shall vote aye. 

Mr. T. H. Williams, when his name was called, said: 

Mr. Speaker, I desire to explain my vote. I had hoped I would not be asked on this 
occasion to cast my vote either way. I had my mind made up as to the guilt or 
innocence of the man who has been on trial for the last three days, but being one of 
the number who had the figures set opposite their names, I desire to let the members of 
the House say whether this man was guilty or not, without calling upon us to vote upon 
the question, and for that reason I have refrained so far from voting; but if I am 


248 


obliged to vote, I shall say to you, sir, that I believe that this man is guilty, and I shall 
vote aye. 

The third specific charge was then read by the Clerk, and 
The Speaker announced the question to be, 

Has the third specific charge been proven ? 

The charge was then declared proven by yeas and nays as follows: 

YEAS. 


Abbott, 

Mr. Damon, 

Mr. Lakey, Mr. 

Rogers, 

Allen, 

Diekerna, 

Lincoln, 

Rounsville, 

Anderson, 

Dillon, 

Linton, 

Rurnsey, 

Ashton, 

Dougherty, 

Makelim, 

Simpson, 

Baker, S. 

Douglass, 

Manly, 

Snow, 

Baker, W. A., 

Dunbar, 

McCormick, 

Spencer, 

Bald win. 

Eldred, 

McGregor, 

Stuart, 

Bard well. 

Engleman, 

M cKie, 

Thompson, 

Bates, 

Goodrich, 

McMillan, 

Tindall, 

Baumgardner, 

Green, 

Mulvey, 

Van Orth wick, 

Beecher, 

Grenell, 

Ogg. 

Vickary, 

Bettinger, 

11 arper. 

O’Keefe, 

Vroman, 

Bentley, 

Haskin, 

Oviatt, 

Washburn, 

Breen, 

Herrington, 

Pardee, 

Watson, F. H. 

Burr, 

Hoaglin, 

Perkins, 

Watson, H., 

Cady, 

Holt, 

Pettit, 

Watts, 

Cannon, 

Hoobler, 

Pierce, 

Webber. 

Case, 

Hosford, 

Powers, 

Wellman, 

Chamberlain, 

Honk, 

Preston, 

Williams.T. H 

Chapell, 

Hunt, 

Keader, 

Williams, W.W 

Chapman, 

J ones. 

Kentz, 

Wilson, 

Cole, 

Kelley, 

Robinson, J.W. 

Wood, 

Crocker, 

Killean, 

Robinson, R., 

Speaker, 

Cross. 

Kirby, 


94 


NAYS. 0 


Mr. Grenell, when his name was called, said: 

I wish to explain my vote. I believe that when Milo H. Dakin put opposite the 
names of honorable members of this Legislature figures designating dollars he was 
unmindful of the high duties of his office. I therefore vote aye. 

Mr. Holt, when his name was called, said: 

Mr. Speaker, in regard to this specific charge, there is no question I think that Mr. 
Dakin, without any authority, without any right of any sort or reason brought the 
names of fifteen members of this House into disrepute. It was done with some evil 
intent. Whether we have found that intent I am not entirely certain, but I think there 
is no question in the mind of any one that he slandered those fifteen members. They 
are all men, in my opinion, above reproach. Four of them are on the judiciary com¬ 
mittee with me. I believe that everyone of them is strictly honest and strictly correct 
in all their deportment. I will stand by them to-night and at all times as I would stand 
by a brother, and I vote aye. 

Mr. Ogg, when his name was called said: 

Mr. Speaker, the newspapers have told us in the last two or three days that the Knights 
of Labor in the House were going to stand by Mr. Dakin at all hazards. I belong to that 


249 


order and you have all known that I have taken a prominent part in labor legislation in 
this House, but at the same time I have never allowed my sympathy to run away with 
my judgment. I believe this is the only charge of the four of which Mr. Dakin is 
guilty. I vote aye. 

Mr. Hosford, when his name was called, said: 

Mr. Speaker—I would refrain from voting, not because I do not desire to cast my 
vote, but because I do not desire to bore the House with another explanation. I do not 
think that when Milo H. Dakin talked about a banquet at the Eichle House he talked 
about a thing in which he did not believe, and I do not think that the influence at a 
banquet depends upon the amount of money expended for it or the place where it is 
given. No one questioned the motive of the honorable Senator from Houghton who 
gave a magnificent spread at the Lansing House not long since. Milo H. Dakin is not 
a distinguished or able man and in his small and somewhat silly way he fancied a ban¬ 
quet could be given at the Eichle House which all the members and their wives could 
attend, and I do not think that any different influence could have been contemplated 
by a banquet at the Eichle House than a banquet at the Lansing House or that any leg¬ 
islator would have thought such a banquet was improper; but I find this charge made, 
that Milo H. Dakin did represent that to secure the votes and influence of said members 
it would be necessary to use with them the amount of money set opposite their names, 
thereby bringing the good name and character of said members into ill-repute, and that 
portion of the charge is unqualifiedly true. I vote aye. 

The Speaker—The chair has had handed to him the following communica¬ 
tion: 

The committee on the part of the House waive any vote on the fourth 
article, believing that the charge is not sustained by the evidence. 

A. E. CHAPMAN, Chairman. 

Mr. Herrington moved that the fourth specific charge be stricken out and 
no vote taken thereon. 

Which motion prevailed, two-thirds of all the members elect voting 
therefor. 

Mr. Baumgardner—I desired to explain my vote and intended to do so 
when my name was called on this charge. 

The Speaker—If there is no objection the gentleman will be allowed to 
explain his vote. 

Mr. Baumgardner : 

Mr. Speaker—I can conceive of no more unpleasant duty that the members of a State 
Legislature could be called upon to perform than that which we are called upon to per¬ 
form to-night. God knows that I feel great sympathy for Mr. Dakin, but I believe that 
feelings of sympathy should not stand in the way of our doing our duty to the State, 
should not stand in the way of our doing our duty to the honorable gentlemen whose 
good names have been brought into disrepute by Mr. Dakin having made out that list 
of names and placed the prices beside them. I would be the last man on earth to cause 
a single pang of pain to any human heart. I have every sympathy in the world for 
Mr. Dakin, but duty compels me to vote as I have because I believe that the charges 
have been sustained by the evidence here presented. 

Reference has been made by one member when he explained his vote to a report 
which has been circulated in this House since the trial bega^, that the Knights of Labor 
members intended to stand by Mr. Dakin, no matter what the evidence might be. I 
32 


250 


think that the way the Kiiights of Labor have voted on this question has hurled the lie 
back into the face of the man who started that report. I vote aye. 

Mr. Crocker offered the following resolution : 

Whereas, The following charges were preferred against Milo H. Dakin, a 
member of the House of Representatives of the first representative district of 
Saginaw county, on the 26th day of April, 1887, to wit: 

SPECIFIC CHARGES. 

Articles exhibited on behalf of the special committee of the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives of the State of Michigan, appointed April 20, 1887, against Milo H. 
Dakin, member of the said House of Representatives, from the first representa¬ 
tive district of Saginaw county, in relation to the charges preferred against him 
for misfeasance, malfeasance, or venal and corrupt conduct in the ofiice. 

ARTICLE I. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives, from the 
first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high duties of 
his office, and of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of April, 
A. D. 1887, and on divers other days and times between the day of taking his 
said oath of office and the time of the preferring of said charges, receive from 
John H. Shakelton, Mayor of Saginaw City, certain sums of money for the 
purpose of corruptly using the same among the members of the House of 
Representatives of the Michigan Legislature in infiuencing votes for the passage 
of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw City then pending before the com¬ 
mittees on labor interests and municipal corporations of said House of Repre¬ 
sentatives. 

ARTICLE II. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his ofifice, and of his oath of* office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of 
April, A. D. 1887, and on divers other days and times, between the day of 
taking his said oath of office and the preferring of said charges, solicit and 
endeavor to procure money from said John H. Shakelton, mayor of Saginaw 
City, from Frederic L. Eaton of Saginaw, and from various other persons for 
the purpose ostensibly of corruptly using such money among the members of 
the House of Representatives of the Michigan State Legislature, to influence 
their votes in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of Saginaw 
City, then pending before the committee on labor interests and municipal cor¬ 
porations of Said House of Representatives, but in fact for the purpose of cor¬ 
ruptly and unlawfully appropriating all or a part of such money for his own 
personal use and benefit. 


ARTICLE III. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, and of his oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day of 
April, in the year A. D. 1887, between the day of taking his said oath of office 
and the preferring of said charges, make a list of names of certain members 
of said House of Re presell tatives, of the State or Michigan, together with the 


251 


amount of money necessary to procure the vote and influence of each of said 
members named in said list, in favor of the passage of a bill to amend the 
charter of Saginaw City, then pending before the committees on labor interests 
and municipal corporations jointly, to wit: 

S. Baker, $5. 

Baldwin, $ 0 . 

Bently, $5. 

Burr, $5. 

Crocker, $10. 

Diekema, $10. 

Dunbar, $5. 

Engleman, $5. 

Herrinsrton, $10. 

Manly, $10. 

McCormick, $5. 

0^ Keefe, $5. 

Pei kins, $10. 

Rumsey, $25. 

T. H. Williams, $10. 

And that said Milo H. Dakin did represent to. said Frederic L. Eaton, of 
Saginaw, that to secure the votes and influence of said members it would be 
necessary to use with each of them the amount of money set opposite his 
name, thereby bringing the good name and character of said members into 
ill-repute. 

ARTICLE IV. 

That said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representatives from 
said first representative district of Saginaw county, unmindful of the high 
duties of his office, and of the oath of office, did corruptly, on the 19th day 
of April, A. D. 1887, and on divers other days and times between the day 
of taking his said oath of office and the preferring of said charges, solicit 
and endeavor to procure money from John H. Shakelton, Mayor of Saginaw 
City, Frederic L. Eaton, and from various other persons, for the purpose of 
corruptly using such money so obtained among the members of the House of 
Representatives of the State of Michigan, to influence their votes and efforts in 
favor of the passage of a bill to amend the charter of the city of Saginaw, then 
pending before the committees on labor interests and municipal corporations 
jointly, of the House of Representatives of Michigan. 

Dated, Lansing, Mich., April 26, 1887. 

A. R. CHAPMAN, 

JOHN V. B. GOODRICH, 

H. W. THOMPSON, 

A. B. PIERCE, 

B. A. SNOW, 

Committee on hehalf of the House of Representatives, 

And Whereas, The said Milo H. Dakin did on the 26th day of April, A. D. 
1887, appear before the committee preferring the said charges and before the 
House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, and thereupon and for 
several days following the said committee in the presence of the said House of 
Representatives, they being in session with the Speaker in the chair, did pro¬ 
ceed to investigate the said charges and allegation heretofore set forth, and the 


252 


said Milo tl. Dakin did appear with his attorneys and answer said charges, and 
after listening to the evidence and the argument of counsel, the said House of 
Representatives did on the i^8th day of April, A. D. 1887, find the said Milo 
H. Dakin guilty as charged in articles two and three; therefore be.it 
Resolved, That the said Milo H. Dakin be expelled from the House. 

MR. CROCKER. 

Mr. Speaker, I wish to exj)lain that resolution and also some points that may bear 
upon it. And first I will have the audacity to answer one proposition made by the 
learned counsel for the defense, Mr. Van Zile, in this case, in which he said that when 
we cast our final vote upon this question we would have to give our reasons and have 
them spread on the journal of this House and sign that journal, as I understand him, 
below the reasons that we should give. I think that my friend labored under some 
misapprehension on this subject. First, he spoke of impeachment. Now, we do not 
impeach members of the House of Representatives, or of the Senate. Neither do we 
impeach members of Congress or of the United States Senate. We simply impeach 
Governors, judges of courts, and other State officers. The proceeding in a case of this 
kind is entirely different! And in order that every member may be satisfied on that 
point I will refer to the constitution of this State. Article 4 section 9 reads as follows : 

“ Each House shall choose its own officers, determine the rules of its proceedings, 
and judge of the qualifications, elections and returns of its members ; and may, with the 
concurrence of two-thirds of all the members elected, expel a member. No member 
shall be expelled a second time for the same cause, nor for any cause known to his con¬ 
stituents antecedent to his election. The reason for such expulsion shall be entered 
upon the journal, with the names of the members voting on the question.” The 
proposition is voted on just the same as any other question might be. 

As to the projniety of a resolution of this kind, I would say that many instances of 
expulsion have occurred in the United States Senate and also in the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives at Washington. 1 would state that on the occasion of the expulsion of the 
Hon. Benj. G. Harris, a member of the House of Representatives from the State of 
Maryland, the proceeding was a very simple one. Mr. Washburn of Illinois offered the 
following: 

“Whereas, Hon. Benj. G. Harris, a member of the House of Representatives of the 
United States from the State of Maryland, has on this day used the following language, 
to wit: ‘ The south asked you to let them go in peace. But no, you said you would 
bring them into subjection. That is not done yet, and God Almighty grant that it 
never may be. I hope that you will never subjugate the south. ’ 

And WHEREAS, Such language is treasonable, and is a gross disrespect of this 
House: Therefore be it 

“•Resolved, That the said Benj. G. Harris be expelled from this House.” 

And thereupon, as that language was used in the House of Representatives, they 
proceeded to discuss the matter then and there and took a vote upon it; and as the vote 
determined that that language was treasonable and a sufficient number of members 
voted for the resolution, Mr. Harris was expelled. 

Now as to the question which may arise in the minds of some whether Mr. Dakin 
should be here present when the vote.is taken. I would simply say that the record in the 
Congressional Globe shows that many men who took part in the war durmg the late 
rebellion on the southern side were expelled when they were not present in congress. I 


253 


will cite one instance of this: On Dec. 4, 1861, the following resolution was offered in 
the United States Senate: 

“Whereas, John C. Breckenridge, a member of this body from the State of Ken¬ 
tucky, has joined the enemies of the country and is now in arms against the government 
he has sworn to support, therefore” 

"'‘Resolved, That the said John C, Breckenridge, the traitor, be and he is hereby ex¬ 
pelled from the Senate.” 

The record shows that the discussion on that resolution occupied about five minutes. 
I could relate other instances of the same kind. I think that it would be safe for us to 
be guided by a precedent established by such a body as the Senate of the United States, 

The Speaker. —The question is on the adoption of the resolution offered 
by the gentleman from Macomb. 

Mr. Ogg—Mr. Speaker—I beg leave to offer a substitute to the resolution 
of the gentleman from Macomb. 

The Clerk read the substitute as follows: 

Resolved, That the House of Eepresentatives do now pass a severe vote of 
censure on Milo H. Dakin for his misconduct towards members of the House 
as decided by the votes taken on article 3 of the charges. 

The question being upon the adoption of the substitute it was not agreed to. 

The Speaker—The question is now on the adoption of the resolution 
offered by the gentleman from Macomb. The Clerk will call the roll. 

The question then being on the adoption the resolution of expulsion of 
Kepresentative Dakin, 

The same was adopted. 

Two-thirds of the members elect voting therefor, by yeas and nays, as fol¬ 


lows: 


YEAS. 


Mr. Abbott, 


Mr. Damon, 


Mr. Lakey, Mr. 


Kogers, 

Rounsville, 

Rumsey, 

Simpson, 

Snow, 

Spencer, 

Stuart, 

Thompson, 

Tindall, 

VanOrthwick, 

Vickary, 

Vroman, 

Washburn, 

Watson, F. H., 

Watson, H., 

Watts, 

Webber, 
Wellman 
Williams,T.H. 
Williams,W.W. 
Wilson, 

Wood, 

Speaker, 


Allen, 

Anderson, 

Ashton, 

Baker, S., 
Baker, W. A., 
Baldwin, 
Bardwell, 
Bates, 

Baumgardner, 

Beecher, 

Bettinger, 

Bentley, 

Breen, 

Burr, 

Cady, 

Cannon, 

Case, 

Chamberlain, 

Chappell, 

Chapman, 

Cole, 

Crocker, 

Cross, 


Diekema, 

Dillon, 

Dougherty, 

Douglass, 

Dunbar, 

Eldred, 

Engleman, 

Goodrich, 

Green, 

Grenell, 

Harper, 

Haskin, 

Herrington 

Hoaglin, 

Holt, 

Hoobler, 

Hosford, 

Houk, 

Hunt, 

Jones, 

Kelley, 

Killean, 

Kirby, 


Lincoln, 

Linton, 


Makelim, 

Manly, 

McCormick, 

McGregor, 

McKie, 

McMillan, 


Mulvey, 

Ogg, 

O’Keefe, 

Oviatt, 

Pardee, 

Perkins, 

Pettit, 

Pierce, 

Powers, 

Preston, 

Reader, 

Rentz, 


Robinson, J.W. 
Robinson, R., 


94 


254 


Mr. Manly, when his name was called,'said : 

Mr. Speaker, I desire to explain my vote. We have approached that position in this 
case when every member is obliged to put himself fairly and squarely on the record in 
this matter, as the counsel has stated on behalf of the defense. That time I do not 
dread and am ready and willing that my vote shall be recorded, and I am willing that 
what I say shall go upon the Journal, to bo read in the future when we all have passed 
away. The gentleman in opening the case in behalf of the committee said that Mr. 
Dakin had cast a stigma upon the hundred members of this House. In my opinion 
there is no question about that. He has cast a reflection upon the record of the whole 
hundred members, including our honored and honorable, but deceased comrade, Ovid 
N. Case, who sleeps quietly in his grave, for he is as much to blame for tliis stigma 
resting upon this body as is any one of the fifteen names mentioned in that list. The 
gentleman who has caused this stigma to rest upon these members is a member of an 
order to which I belong ; he is a member of the Grand Army of the Republic, earning 
that position by hard service in behalf of his country, and as one of that order I have 
solemnly pledged that I would not wrong a brother member knowingly. Therefore 
when these charges were made against these men, and I was present at the time he 
confronted these fifteen men, I thought then that perhaps there might be some mistake 
in this matter. 

He came before that committee with a light step, but when he saw those fifteen men 
around him, he stopped and looked as though he had met men that he had in some 
way wronged. He was presented with the paper which has been shown in evidence 
here by the Speaker of this House. He looked at the paper calmly and quietly. He 
studied those names and said, “ I recognize that paper. I made those figures and it 
means money.” He gave his statement there in a slow, measured tone, facing the 
Speaker. I then was in hopes perhaps there might be a mistake, but that man has 
come upon the witness stand and swore that the statements he made there are true with 
one slight exception. My duty to him as a comrade of the Grand Army ceased when I 
knew he had knowingly and willfully wronged at least two of that order. Representa¬ 
tive Williams and myself, by casting reflection at least upon our honor and our credit, 
which, although we are in no way to blame, will follow us in long days to come. But 
we are not alone in this disgrace. It spreads upon the name of every man who is a 
member of this Legislature, and I as a member, can do no more in duty to myself, in 
justice to my fellow comrades here, members of this House, and in duty to the God 
that looks down upon us to-night than to say, yes, guilty as charged. 

Mr. Snow, when his name was called said: 

I desire to say that this is one of the most painful duties that I have ever been called 
upon to perform, but sir, I wiU not, I cannot shirk my duty, therefore I vote aye. 

Mr. Stuart, when his name was called said: 

There has been something said with regard to some organization. I do not care what 
the organization is that I belong to. I shirk from nothing that I think is honest. I 
vote aye. 

Mr. Wood, when his name was called said: 

In the beginning of this trial I sincerely believed that Mr. Dakin was more sinned 
against than sinning. I believed that he was the victim of a conspiracy and I was 
strong in my opinion that the gentleman from Saginaw, Mr. Eaton, was at the bottom 
of all this, and had this been simply tried by the committee and we had voted to expel 


255 


Mr. Dakin at the time, I would have voted no; but since it has been carefully tried I 
think the evidence has proven that Mr. Eaton is all right, and that I owe him an apol¬ 
ogy, and that Mr. Dakin is guilty. Therefore I vote aye. 

Mr. Grenell, when his name was called said: 

If there were any possibility of any other punishment than the punishment of ex¬ 
pulsion being accorded to Mr. Dakin I would gladly vote for that instead of expulsion, 
but so long as there is no other punishment and so long as I am compelled to vote for 
some kind of punishment, I am compelled to vote aye. 

Mr. Hosford, when his name was called, said: 

Mr. Speaker—I said a short time ago that I would rather be right than President; but 
I fear that in my notion of being right I am very lonesome. I have some idea that the 
Legislature may by its vote be carrying into effect the purpose of the designing enemies 
of this man. But that he is guilty under charge three as the House has voted, I have no 
doubt. And now, although not without much misgiving, I vote aye. 

The Speaker then declared that 

Two-thirds of the members elect having voted therefor, the resolution is 
adopted, and the said Milo H. Dakin, member of the House of Representa¬ 
tives from the first representative district of Saginaw county, is from, and 
after this date, expelled from the fioor of the House and debarred from any 
and all the rights, privileges and advantages of a member of said House 
during the balance of his present official term. 

Mr. W. A. Baker moved to take from the table the following resolution: 

Resolved, That the sum of two hundred dollars be and is hereby appro¬ 
priated for the purpose of enabling Representative Dakin to pay counsel in 
defending him from the charges preferred against him for misfeasance, mal¬ 
feasance, or venal or corrupt conduct in office. 

Which motion prevailed. 

The question being on the adoption of the resolution. 

Pending the vote thereon. 

On motion of Mr. Chapman, the House adjourned. 












" 

t. ■ 

' I’fc 




t'-' 


•; '■ ’ v'•'\ 



,'4 


■ ’r’ 







f '■ 





f 






• V 





- ' * - 
* ^ '*1 ^ - 


V.;/ 

. <U' •■ 



^■’fT^'^rs^. 

■if t •*■' 


V ;•/ .* 




V 


. * * / r.J -■ ■■ .^/ . ■ 1?S 

,■»■:- v,-V-- .»V; - •■ ' ■*• . v« 

^swBib ’ - r t riaQj 


A 







r 4-. 




>i' hi 

i \ 




., ^ ,.j' * 't* 


« •« 






-O 



w ^ • 

<'4^' 




/ V. 




■y *- I 








f • 



j . « 


’ • • I ' 


>« 

‘•f.;Vti.^r 


1^’ '■ ''jj!^ ^ ^ 

~ U 'ji, ■ » , » 


. * 


> •■•.• 


. I 


■.. SrA.y,':'-‘&’ y 




* -• dRii'i 

't* •*♦» 

rv-:---.'; ■■, 



'.-. '’ic ‘-VI 




.. ■',? - 
, . . v %1 

■" f • ■' '< .. ■ 



l^i^ 


I 


^ » * : « 




‘W vn 

£i ^ tV< 

^ 4 . ••• '-*•¥. 

• V L * 

4 • *• , - • 

• < 


* * 


U A. 



• yV r ^ , 


/■ 


I' 


4 > 


i' 




3t 


i- 


i*. 


^-1 







‘^'V- f 

I* 


< • 


t ' / 


m 

A 



:yt 


A V 


*y. A 




<r 1 y ii 






w 











